171–180 of 206 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
And that doesn't happen with private companies? There's loads of fraud that goes on there too.
Which is why those companies hire entire departments dedicated to fraud. If a government agency stepped in and instead offered to do fraud investigation for free, that would provide a rather nice reduction to their overhead costs.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It would be unconstitutional for a U.S. state to treat newly-established residents differently than long-established ones with regard to a welfare benefit: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/national/longterm/supco... . Countries like Germany don't have this problem because they have the power to control their borders. Accessing Germany's healthcare system requires being a German resident. That, in general, require…
Interesting... I wonder how places like California are allowed to still offer different rates for in-state vs out-of-state tuition at the UCs?
There's also the tough questions, such as who gets access to the best doctors, at the best hospitals?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Which would mark the second time in 241 years those states agreed upon something... In all seriousness, state run healthcare is a great idea, but the government is just such a big stakeholder in having a healthy population that I do not see a good reason for it [at some level] to stay out of that line of business. Single payer works, so much better than the current setup...why not start there and try iterate?
That would all be fine and dandy if it weren't for that pesky 200yr old document that explicitly denies the federal government the right to micromanage except in very specific circumstances.
ORRRRR....you do what you've done 27 times before, and you amend the 200 yr old document :) We all make mistakes, sometimes the best option is to own up to them and do something different.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Who's not receiving healthcare right now that would be ultimately saved by the government? People not receiving basic preventative care with problems that are only going to snowball until emergency services can try to treat a much more complex situation in the future? > Secondly let's cut the hyperbole and have a rational conversation about this. You could have maybe had a point by quoting "but the market will win"…
"Americans will die needless deaths" when they're on long wait lists for procedures because of a glut on resources when they no longer have access to the high quality care they once had when there's a greater shortage of quality nurses and doctors because of diminished pay when innovation is stifled because R&D is funded by the government
Yes it will be complicated, and yes, even if healthcare is guaranteed to all, profit motive is still an important driver for efficiency and innovation.
All of that, but it's still irrelevant to your dismissal of actual deaths due to our healthcare system as "appeal to emotion nonsense".
I would like to understand better what is meant by "single payer". I think I know what it should mean, but then I see France as an example of single-payer system. France has a complex system of insurance bodies (public entities, privates companies, some weird stuff in between)... If I understand correctly the biggest savings come from the mandatory nature of the coverage - everybody is covered at least partially by t…
If you have no work, there is an universal healthcare to cover you, but you cannot get fancy glasses or good tooth implant.
The prices are regulated by deciding the amount reimbursed by the national healthcare for each medical act. The private healthcare reimbursement are based on these prices. Doctors are free to ask more money, but you are going to pay the delta.
Savings are mainly achieved by having both sick and healthy people paying. Also, the fact that any medical treatment is basically free encourages you to see your doctor everytime you are beginning to be sick, preventing complications leading to a stay in hospital.
Note also that many private healthcare are mutual insurance which are lowering the rates if there is a profit.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Which would mark the second time in 241 years those states agreed upon something... In all seriousness, state run healthcare is a great idea, but the government is just such a big stakeholder in having a healthy population that I do not see a good reason for it [at some level] to stay out of that line of business. Single payer works, so much better than the current setup...why not start there and try iterate?
That would all be fine and dandy if it weren't for that pesky 200yr old document that explicitly denies the federal government the right to micromanage except in very specific circumstances.
right, as long as you ignore 200 years of legal precedent in which it has...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Who's not receiving healthcare right now that would be ultimately saved by the government? People not receiving basic preventative care with problems that are only going to snowball until emergency services can try to treat a much more complex situation in the future? > Secondly let's cut the hyperbole and have a rational conversation about this. You could have maybe had a point by quoting "but the market will win"…
"Americans will die needless deaths" when they're on long wait lists for procedures because of a glut on resources when they no longer have access to the high quality care they once had when there's a greater shortage of quality nurses and doctors because of diminished pay when innovation is stifled because R&D is funded by the government
because of a glut on resources
The word "negotiation" is a euphemism here: > The most important source of cost savings under single-payer is that large government entities are able to negotiate much more favorable terms with service providers. If there are no other options for clients, it's essentially the government telling doctors how much their services are worth.
Living in what is essentially a single-payer health care system (Norway), I assure you we don't see many MDs sleeping in cardboard boxes under freeway overpasses. On a more serious note - education and skills tend to pay off. Around here, doctors with their own practice are reimbursed by the state via several mechanisms, the two most significant ones are probably a fixed sum for each patient they are responsible for…
> "Of course, having to pay taxes is itself a mandate of a sort, but it’s one the electorate has largely come to terms with." Some taxes maybe? The whole "mandate vs. tax" argument was at the core of the opposition to the Affordable Care Act. I would argue that this issue is not decided by a long shot and a great deal of people are still upset by this. Further, this article addresses aggregate costs but doesn't ackno…
I would argue that this issue is not decided by a long shot