Defeating the bogeyman of single payer healthcare

Why don't all doctors/hospitals accept Medicare patients then ??

 

MONEY.

 

M

Maybe they don't know what "triage" means?

 

M

Maybe they don't know what "triage" means?

 

M

Maybe they don't know what "triage" means?

 

Good guess. Or should I say "excuse"?

 

Exactly. The reimbursement rates are too low. Costs for medical treatment and consequently premiums for conventional insurance are higher to make up for the losses. The costs imposed on the overall system from treating the uninsured is minimal.

http://www.kff.org/report-section/u...-and-remaining-uncompensated-care-costs-8596/

 

your point?

 

Then maybe we should try a free market approach. One where a doctor makes reccomendations and explains the reasoning behind that. Then the patient decide which tests and procedures work for them.

Instead people want to walk into their govt designated doctor. Receive a list of orders from their govt doctor. Then submit to whatever tests the govt deems necessary.

 

So show us a workable proposal for the US. One that doesn't include massive tax hikes to cover another 2 trillion in federal spending. One that shows how the govt will actually pay for this.

 

What country does this free market model?

 

None that I'm aware of in the last 100 years or so. Why do you ask?

 

So no one can do it successfully....but we should give it a go? That is madness

 

Are you saying that the US can't figure it out?


As I've pointed out several times in this thread and others, there is a building industry for cash only medical care now. With a little support from the law, that industry will grow dramatically and actually lower the cost of care.


Speaking for me personally. If my employer deposited by health insurance payment into an HSA monthly and I could pay my monthly fee from that, I would dump insurance for cash only in a second.

Of course that requires a law passed to allow that. We also need a change to Obamacare to allow high deductible catastrophic care plans.

 

Yes I am saying the US can't figure it out. No country can. That's why no country does it SUCCESSFULY. There are countries that do it.....they are failed states

 

Really? Point one out. Also point out an industrialized country that has tried it and failed.

 

No successful country will even try it. It can't work. But countries like Sudan, Somalia...etc have a free market healthcare system

 

Why can't it work?

And I noticed that you didn't back up your previous statement about no country trying it successfully, and instead revert to Sudan and Somalia.

Which begs the question, why do you want a Soviet style system?

 

I want a scandanavian or Canadian style system. Ask yourself.....why will no country do this?

 

Read the link.

 

Because they want govt control over heath care.

 

So you have an unproven model

 

Incrementally lower the Medicare eligibility age to introduce progressively lower cost demographics into the pool. By taking advantage of the extant administrative structure, maximizing the risk pool, advantaging economy of scale, and eliminating the multiply-duplicated executive compensations, employee payrolls, infrastructures, profit margins, agency commissions, advertising, marketing, etc., etc., etc. - as well as the annual $250 billion tax write-off the subsidizes employer-administered plans - the US can approximate the proven superior efficiency of advanced nations.

Show me the ideologues' alternative that approached the existing paradigm that covers all citizens at around half the cost the US spends while leaving tens of millions of the taxpayer's tab.

 

Several major issues with that plan.

1. Building an entire new administrative structure for developing and administering the plans will hugely expensive. Most likely completely eliminating any savings that would be gained from multiple companies and their payrolls.

2. Medicare loses its base of cost sharing which will cause the rate doctors charge to increase, or doctors will be forced to see more patients in a day to cover those shortfalls.

3. Access will likely be diminished, especially in the first decade or so of implementation. As it is now, there is a shortage of doctors taking on new Medicare patients in sp me areas. There is also increased competition from the cash only market that's gaining steam within the middle class.

4. Fraud is already a massive issue with Medicare and accounts for anywhere from 5 to 10% of all expenditures every year. This will likely grow as the program grows. We could see anywhere from 200 billion to 500 billion in fraud on a yearly basis if that ratio stays the same.


Then there will be other issues that no one can foresee arising with the implementation. Much like the $1 billion for the Obamacare website.
http://time.com/3060276/obamacare-affordable-care-act-cost/

 

You seem not want to see Americans enjoy the universal coverage at far lower cost that citizens of advanced nations have achieved.

Unlike the GOP, do you have a serious alternative that achieves Trump's stated goal: "something terrific!" that covers "everybody!" at "lower cost!"?