381–390 of 1001 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Half the population does not vote. This is the problem socialists have- how do you get the underclass to exercise their power against the bourgeois?
No, the problem socialists have is that most people are smart enough to realize they won't be better off under a socialist regime, to the chagrin of the self-selected vanguard.
[flagged]
The government provides your police force and fire department. Why not?
In the UK, a brain surgeon is paid less than the General Manager of a single Buc-ees Gas Station location in the United States. Absolutely diabolical.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Even if universal health coverage lost money it would be better than the current system that is based on a "causing cancer is better for the GDP than curing it" mentality.
The US has top-tier cancer survival-after-diagnosis outcomes. We spend too much to get there, and other countries in our cohort would "argue" that we get those numbers in part by diagnosing earlier and that our outcomes are broadly similar, but if you're going into these debates with "the US private health care system causes cancer deaths", that's a pretty rebuttable argument.
I don't want it. I don't want to pay for it either. anything the fed government does is utter crap.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> we could have just expanded Medicaid Laws need votes. If we are going to be unbound by reality then we could "just" put a medbed to cure all diseases, reverse ageing, and regrow limbs using quantum space-age tech in everyone's home.
Too many people think snark is a substitute for insight. The major GOP complaint about the entire thing was that it was the federal government forcing people to buy a product from companies. The Supreme Court ruled that it had that power.
Republicans fought hard to discredit their own plan. They just wanted to move to the right of whatever it was that the black man championed.
Who's gonna tell the doctors and nurses that they get a 50% pay cut?
You think they’re getting so much money from out current system that cutting out insurance companies would result in a 50% reduction in their pay? Have you ever looked up the size of the health insurance sector here?
I'd like to believe this, but the study makes a bunch of really hasty assumptions. The authors derive the $1T number from $1.3T in total cost savings and $304B in incremental spend (incremental spend is due to insuring more people). The $1.3T in cost savings come from five big buckets: lower pharmaceutical prices, Medicare-level payments to providers, reduced administrative overhead, less fraudulent billing, and fewe…
I don't spend any healthcare money at the hospital. It's all all providers office, private clinic, etc.
It costs $300 for my primary care doctor to see me for about 7 minutes. An assistant takes my blood pressure, he asks me a few questions about my habits and diet, and then I come back next year.
If I actually need any services, I go to much more expensive specialist, or urgent care facility. A visit there is about $100 and then a couple bucks for whatever prescription they give me.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
can someone tell me this. Right now level of care is rationed by type of insurance you can afford. eg: northwestern in chicago downtown is inaccesible to ppl below certain income level. In universal everyone has access to every hospital ? Why would someone go to lower level hospital if they can go to northwestern. Now the acess to best hosptials is gated by a queue? I am not saying this is right but ppl who already h…
> Now the acess to best hosptials is gated by a queue? I mean, yes? Literally the same principle we all learned in kindergarten for how to make access to something fair. You didn't get to skip the line in lunch because your parents had a better job than someone else either.
If a child cannot pay, there are some districts that serve cheaper alternative meals that don't meet the normal lunch standards, some that shame children by giving them hand stamps, and even some that will literally dump their tray in the trash.
We've been down this road. ACA was predicated on studies like this, to no avail (it turns out that intense opposition chips away at it over time regardless of these studies). I'm of the opinion that, if your solution requires perpetual majority control of legislative, executive, and judicial branches, your solution is in fact a campaign slogan. I'm not saying that this is what is happening now , but I am saying that…
I suspect Social Security would have met that definition at one point in time. Perhaps even paid overtime, the 40-hour work-week, etc.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> These are life-changing possibilities, especially for entrepreneurs. I would quit my day job and completely focus on my side business if I didn't have to worry about healthcare.
Part of the reason why there is no effort to fix this, to keep you a slave to a job that provides healthcare. Imagine the reduction in labor supply and increase in labor costs if healthcare did not require employment. On can, in many cases (facts intensive), bail to a developed country with healthcare if you want to realize this dream earlier than whenever the US will achieve the outcome (and your life situation supp…
This is one major reason why most of the world's universal systems make private insurance work, and it doesn't blow up the way ours does. But I don't think employers are any happier about it than you are!