Healthy California Act: proposal to make findings about single-payer healthcare

Post by refurb » Thu, Mar 09, 2017, 1:58 AM UTC

nickv wrote: post #289

refurb wrote: post #209

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As a Canadian as well, I appreciate you being up front about the drawbacks of our system as well. I've heard so many American's say "oh, the Canadian system is so much better". Is it better in coverage? Obviously! However, when I ask if they'd be ok waiting over a year for joint replacement surgery, they get a weird look on their face. Or, if they have cancer, they aren't going to get to go to the best cancer center…

How many Americans do you think get to go and get their cancer treated at Memorial Sloan Kettering? The US private health care system doesn't mean everyone who gets cancer goes to MD Anderson. And, you'd still be very hard pressed to have many private insurance plans cover truly experimental treatments. If I had to choose who gets advanced treatments between those who can pay the most vs those who need it the most I'…

Post by SilasX » Thu, Mar 09, 2017, 1:59 AM UTC

chimeracoder wrote: post #286

SilasX wrote: post #269

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Because the amount of loan debt physicians have to take on is already massive, and very few would want to increase that by an additional $112,000 (which is the amount Medicare provides). Sure, you think it's expensive, but the demand is still there, people are willing to work for (net of costs) less than they currently are. That supports the claim that the service is priced above the market clearing level. (Edit: an…

> Sure, you think it's expensive, but the demand is still there, people are willing to work for (net of costs) less than they currently are. That supports the claim that the service is priced above the market clearing level. * There are more people who apply for publicly-funded GME every year than there are positions available, yes. * However, almost nobody (roughly speaking) applies for self-funded residency positio…

Post by piedpiper_ » Thu, Mar 09, 2017, 1:59 AM UTC

hprotagonist wrote: post #123

__realtime wrote: post #93

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> as a Californian...I'd rather that people like me... There is crux of the issue: not everyone shares the same opinion and belief, so should the government force those people to spend their earned income on healthcare for others? Personally I think it won't end up how you anticipate but that's just me. Right now the working people of America are already subsidizing healthcare for the masses and all I ever hear is pe…

>not everyone shares the same opinion and belief, so should the government force those people to spend their earned income on healthcare for others? Yes. Ideally, that's what governments should do: require citizens to act in our collective and long-term best interests, not only their own. In the case of healthcare: a healthy population is a productive, happy, and peaceful population. All of those things are good for…

Post by Uhhrrr » Thu, Mar 09, 2017, 2:00 AM UTC

anonymid wrote: post #129

gavman wrote: post #32

Vermont tried this a few years ago, they had to cancel it since in the end it wasn't financially feasible [1]. CA is already dealing with severe budget issues [2][3], so while it sounds nice in theory I'm hesitant to believe the finances actually work out. [1] http://www.politico.com/story/2014/12/single-payer-vermont-1... [2] http://www.latimes.com/projects/la-me-pension-crisis-davis-d... [3] http://www.cnbc.com/201…

I wouldn't mind paying more taxes in order to provide others with something I consider a human right. Under single-payer, CA employers will no longer need to provide insurance for their employees. That money could in some way pay for this. It also makes the idea of a 'gig economy' much more palatable, since people working in short-term / part-time situations will no longer have to go without employer-provided insuran…

Post by jxramos » Thu, Mar 09, 2017, 2:01 AM UTC

DrScump wrote: post #288

mmanfrin wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[2] is about CalPERS, which is separate from the budget of the State. There may be a current budget shortfall, but CalPERS is fine (it is the largest non-country pension fund in the world; and comes in the top 10 when listed among countries). [3] mentions that tax revenues will fall because of the end of temporary tax increases; those increases are likely to be renewed. Categorizing these as 'severe budget issues' is…

California has had a bumper crop in terms of tax revenue ... but is outspending even that! There was a "surprise" extra $1.9 billion deficit hit from Medi-Cal last fiscal year[0] (which should tell you something about the government's inability to track or control spending), and an overall budget deficit is projected for the current year. And this doesn't even count the huge infrastructure deficiencies and deferred m…