Healthcare--a right or not?

In this context health insurance.

- - - Updated - - -

Why would a provider opt out?

 

Because it works

 

You think obamacare 'works'? the US has had the best, most advanced, highest tech medical care in the world.. BECAUSE it was separate from govt control. Anything that is put under the administration of govt turns bad. Govt housing. The VA. You would like all of our healthcare to be run like the VA?

Corruption is rampant in any & all of the govt mandated programs. Putting them in charge of healthcare has made it less functional, MUCH more expensive, & is bleeding out cash faster than any other govt program. There is no rational, fiscal reason to believe the govt can run healthcare efficiently.

 

Except that there are a ton of examples of government run healthcare all over the world that gets better outcomes for much less cost

 

Ummm...... You might want to look at this. Non-profit? "Membership" $20/month?? A co-op? Socialist approach? WOW!

https://www.patientphysiciancoop.com/

 

Really? Name one. Here's a list of the top 10 nations of the world by population. Tell me which one has great healthcare for less cost..
1. China 1,373,541,278
2. India 1,266,883,598
3. United States 323,995,528
4. Indonesia 258,316,051
5. Brazil 205,823,665
6. Pakistan 201,995,540
7. Nigeria 186,053,386
8. Bangladesh 156,186,882
9. Russia 142,355,415
10. Japan 126,702,133
11. Mexico 123,166,749
12. Philippines 102,624,209
13. Ethiopia 102,374,044
14. Vietnam 95,261,021
15. Egypt 94,666,993

A voluntary coop is socialism?

 

We all know that you don't mind threatening peaceful people with violence if they don't fork over what you want, but you don't write screeds, just shallow one liners that many people ignore.

 

What about Canada? It seems to work here for us. I am not saying that Americans must emulate our system or anything like that. I am merely pointing out that our system works.

 

California is bigger than all of Canada. Maybe, if it was handled right, it could work in a single state. But a nation the size of the US? A centralized healthcare administration? Sounds like a recipe for disaster to me.

Plus, i haven't heard all that many Canadians singing the praises of socialized medicine there. We get a lot of snowbirds here in Az, & many of the Canadians go to US private hospitals for critical treatment... rather than wait in line for the bureaucratic handouts.

 

You just wrote a one liner. LOL

 

You can not get elected dog catcher in canada if you say you want to do away with their healthcare system. They LOVE it. What country that has EVER had single payer is switching back to our model?

- - - Updated - - -

Who on this list has socialized medicine? Japan might. If they all suck and none have socialized medicine....what does that tell you. LOL

 

We could poll canadians & californians.. .would you like the 'State' to manage your healthcare? Californians are already drowning in a cesspool of failed progressive fiscal policies. How do you think they could manage healthcare? They can't manage the safety net. They can't manage the borders. They can't manage the abundance of resources they have, but squander it with corrupt & foolish projects.

And, if a state the size of california can't handle healthcare, what makes us think the whole nation can?

 

It needs to happen at the federal level

 

No it doesn't.

 

source

Japan has a much different, more homogenous culture than the US.. and is 1/3 as big. Socialized medicine is barely working there, & has many ponzi type issues coming up. How would that be any different for America?

There is no 'something for nothing' even in America. The costs associated with obamacare have been enormous.. eclipsing all the estimates & rosy projections from the govt fast talking con men. If we go down that pathway, you can expect it to deteriorate faster, & lose more medical people, & cost more, than it ever has before. Doom & gloom is all i see for American Socialized Medicine. Let the states try it, if they want.

 

Where's the insurance company and their profit? Where is any profit to be found in it? It's organized as a direct service negotiated by/for members directly with providers with no private insurance companies between them. No socialist would object to it.

 

Not only that, but as can be seen in this thread, there isn't much of an attempt to even try to convince us that it's in our best interests to replace obamacare with a single payer system. These guys don't believe in natural rights, they do believe in using the power of the state to force us to participate in it, and their argument in favor basically goes "I can't afford my own medical bills, so you're going to have to pitch in and help whether you like it, or not!".

I think it's safe to say that we don't have to worry about socialized medicine any time soon. Trump might replace obamacare with something else, but it sounds like it's just going to be repealed.

 

Ranking by population means you stacked the deck. First, here are ten countries ranked by outcomes: http://bit.ly/2ma2XkQ

Here is another measure: http://theincidentaleconomist.com/wordpress/health-outcomes-report-cards-by-country/

Survival rates by country: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_quality_of_healthcare

Fox News reports "US health outcomes far worse than other comparable nations" -
http://www.foxnews.com/health/2013/...-far-worse-than-other-comparable-nations.html

And we all know the cost of healthcare in the U.S. is more than in any other country. The nearest is Switzerland and we pay 38% more per capita.

See why we cll the right wing answers "spin"?

 

I see no evidence for anything in that post. Socialized medicine is a huge succes wherever it has been tried. NO ONE wants our model. Ours is the model of failure

 

There's no evidence for anything in any of the statistics any of you post, least of all what you want to prove.

 

Discuss the inclusion criteria, methods, endpoints and analysis of the studies that demonstrate this causal relationship.

 

Of course you do.

 

What difference does it make if its granted or not subdued?
If it existed outside the 1A, what was the need to put it in there? It should go without saying.

- - - Updated - - -

And I said there are able bodied that are 65 and older. Yet they choose not to work. Do you have a problem with them?

 

But that is not how the physician incomes will get lowered, by tax rates only.

For every nationalized healthcare advocate, we should nationalize their occupation and cut their income significantly, to help pay for the (*)(*)(*)(*) they want! Oh yeah, and take theirr income tax rate up to the top rate so that they can do their fair share, and not freeload

 

What makes you a teacher?
You can't even explain or back up what you want to teach?
You don't know the difference between natural and legal. You tried to tell me natural rights, gave a definition and the word legal is plastered in it. Not a thing about natural.

You realized that, and then lashed out into personal attacks. This is your 2nd time.
It's not about making me feel better, it's trying to understand what you're wanting to say. Legal and natural are not the same. Do you know this?

I will have a better understanding of the law? What law, you have been claiming some natural right. A natural right does not need a law.

PS - Have you even explicitly said what this natural law is?