The Problem of Health Care

Discussion in 'Economics & Trade' started by LafayetteBis, Oct 21, 2019.

  1. squidward

    squidward Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 23, 2009
    Messages:
    37,112
    Likes Received:
    9,515
    Trophy Points:
    113
    False
     
  2. LafayetteBis

    LafayetteBis Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Oct 24, 2016
    Messages:
    9,744
    Likes Received:
    2,086
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    The studies show that the US rates high (third in the list of countries) for health-care delivery.

    That is, if you can afford it. And the healthcare insurance that your company pays for is compensated from the cost of its products/services. Which means that when you-plural go shopping for any product/service, you are also paying for someone's healthcare.

    If you don't have any healthcare insurance, you are paying nonetheless for someone else's.

    Which is why a National Healthcare System, paid out of government funds (obtained by taxation) and accessible to ALL Americans is a far more just/fair system ...
     
  3. WillReadmore

    WillReadmore Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 21, 2013
    Messages:
    59,473
    Likes Received:
    16,351
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I answered a specific question that was directed at what we have TODAY, not what we should have.

    What we have today is critical in understanding the problem we face with our mismatched and totally inadequate patchwork of programs.
     
  4. WillReadmore

    WillReadmore Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 21, 2013
    Messages:
    59,473
    Likes Received:
    16,351
    Trophy Points:
    113
    ???
     
  5. WillReadmore

    WillReadmore Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 21, 2013
    Messages:
    59,473
    Likes Received:
    16,351
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I fully agree.

    And, other countries demonstrate far better and less expensive solutions to healthcare, making it clear that it's entirely possible to be far better than we are today.

    Part of this discussion is oriented to what we have, which clarifies the problem we have today.
     
  6. squidward

    squidward Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 23, 2009
    Messages:
    37,112
    Likes Received:
    9,515
    Trophy Points:
    113
    As opposed to true?
     
  7. LafayetteBis

    LafayetteBis Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Oct 24, 2016
    Messages:
    9,744
    Likes Received:
    2,086
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Yes, and which clarifies the problem of WHAT WE DO NOT HAVE.

    Which is a National Healthcare System that attends to all citizen-patients to prolongs lifespans. The principle and its ultimate objective are so damn evident it is amazing that more Americans do not see it ...
     
    Last edited: Jan 28, 2020
  8. kreo

    kreo Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 1, 2008
    Messages:
    8,791
    Likes Received:
    798
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Yep, it is funny, but it seems like Americans are the problem.
    Only very small percentage of people understand the issue, but majority never speak up or express any objection to the system of private over-taxation and outright theft.
     
  9. WillReadmore

    WillReadmore Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 21, 2013
    Messages:
    59,473
    Likes Received:
    16,351
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I suspect that people don't realize that all other first world countries have systems such as Medicare for All, and thus pay less for healthcare.

    If they knew that, I think it would help them get over the idea that the only way we can improve the cost of healthcare coverage is to deny healthcare to millions of US citizens.
     
  10. Reiver

    Reiver Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 24, 2008
    Messages:
    39,883
    Likes Received:
    2,144
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Perhaps you need to go further? To what extent can we, for example, blame Democrat conservatism for reinforcing the opinion that an economic efficiency change isn't possible? Have they enabled status quo bias by being a little crappy?
     
  11. WillReadmore

    WillReadmore Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 21, 2013
    Messages:
    59,473
    Likes Received:
    16,351
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Congressional Republicans were dead set against moving in the direction of a single payer system.

    The result of the bipartisan approach was the ACA - which was a significant advancement in a number of ways and resulted in millions more being covered.

    I think American health care opinion has moved since then.

    And, in comparing the two prties there is NO question. Dems have pushed on healthcare for DECADES, and have incorporated features such as coverage of preexisting conditions and help in including millions more Americans.

    Republicans have been interested in KILLING that - even without having ANYTHING to put in place.

    Taking away our healthcare coverage system without a replacement it is profoundly irresponsible. And, Republicans have tried to do EXACTLY that more than 60 times.

    So, attempting to "blame" Dems for not having broader coverage is just plain silly.
     
    clennan likes this.
  12. Reiver

    Reiver Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 24, 2008
    Messages:
    39,883
    Likes Received:
    2,144
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Pushed for decades and achieved very little? Why is that? The point is simple. They aren't radical enough. They look for marginal improvement, allowing the Republicans to rely on status quo bias. The Democrats are certainly to blame. And I certainly blame those that have encouraged such an insipid left.
     
  13. squidward

    squidward Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 23, 2009
    Messages:
    37,112
    Likes Received:
    9,515
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Sales pitch for Dem plan, "All kinds of ****, for cheep".
     
  14. Reiver

    Reiver Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 24, 2008
    Messages:
    39,883
    Likes Received:
    2,144
    Trophy Points:
    113
    We know that the US system embraces economic inefficiency. Imagine the amusement value in right wingers celebrating economic inefficiency?
     
  15. WillReadmore

    WillReadmore Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 21, 2013
    Messages:
    59,473
    Likes Received:
    16,351
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Why? Because Republicans fought against it.

    Being significantly more "radical" than the majority of Americans or a majority of Congress leads to LESS progress, not more progress.

    Under most circumstances, it's necessary to convince members of congress that don't belong to your own party.

    Under Obama, the president chose healthcare is the primary issue for his first term. Congress progressed by forming a bipartisan committee to create an improved healthcare system.

    Republicans had a disasterous election cycle. Unfortunately, the response to that by McConnell and then House Speaker Boehner stated publically that they would force the failure of the ACA regardless of WHAT it was simply to prove that Republicans still had power.

    In the end, that meant that the system would need to get the votes of every single Democrat in Congress. Democrats don't do lock step like Republicans do, so the ACA had to have cuts to features that not every single Democrat could vote for.

    The big one that got cut was a public option.

    The idea that MORE radical approach would have worked is just plain false. The American public and their congressmen were not ready for that.
     
  16. WillReadmore

    WillReadmore Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 21, 2013
    Messages:
    59,473
    Likes Received:
    16,351
    Trophy Points:
    113
    You'll have to admit that's better than having a trillion dollar deficit even when the economy is OK.

    And, there are examples of systems that deliver healthcare to all their citizens for far less than we pay.
     
  17. Reiver

    Reiver Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 24, 2008
    Messages:
    39,883
    Likes Received:
    2,144
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Its a behavioural analysis. By offering marginal change, without any radical solution, they allow status quo bias. They ironically encourage support for Republican indifference.

    I'll set you a simple task. Show me where Obama and co actually asked for radical change from the norm? Good luck! Democrat irrelevance is always in full display!
     
    Last edited: Feb 1, 2020
  18. WillReadmore

    WillReadmore Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 21, 2013
    Messages:
    59,473
    Likes Received:
    16,351
    Trophy Points:
    113
    First of all, the ACA was a huge change.

    Beyond that, your idea about it being easier to sell a more radical idea is clearly not something that works in Congress. If anything, congress trails public opinion. And, large change requires getting significant agreement. Bills go through a meat grinder of amendments watering down and cuttng out stuuff that looks radical.

    When the ACA reached the point where changes had to be made through amendment, Republicans issued more than 160 amendments that were accepted - let alone the amendments from both sides that failed.


    Or, do you have an example of radical legislation that was successful because of being radical?
     
  19. Reiver

    Reiver Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 24, 2008
    Messages:
    39,883
    Likes Received:
    2,144
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Was it? As someone from a national health service, I look at that and laugh.

    You've missed the point. The lack of radical action by the Democrats has set the scene. It ensured status quo bias is the norm, corrupting the electorate. They should have transformed the debate by offering a radical alternative. What amuses me is that you haven't even started from principles (such as a NHS being consistent with basic justice). From that lack of principled comment, you've simply licked the backside of Democrat indifference.
     
    Last edited: Feb 1, 2020
  20. WillReadmore

    WillReadmore Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 21, 2013
    Messages:
    59,473
    Likes Received:
    16,351
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I don't mean to be discouraging.

    I think people are more in favor of single payer today - and that it's a growing idea.

    We need to prove that is what the people want. It's going to take more than a president who wants it. Congress has to understand that's what their constituencies want.
     
  21. Reiver

    Reiver Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 24, 2008
    Messages:
    39,883
    Likes Received:
    2,144
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Sorry, that isn't good enough. The very reason the div Trump is in power is because of Democrat orthodoxy. Time to celebrate radical change. Time to actually have principles, rather than peddle the orthodoxy crap by previous Democrat politician.

    I have nothing but contempt for Democrat efforts over health care. They have guaranteed continued inefficiency (with horrific amenable mortality consequences).
     
  22. squidward

    squidward Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 23, 2009
    Messages:
    37,112
    Likes Received:
    9,515
    Trophy Points:
    113
    the US system is heavily distorted by government, especially the part that costs the most, the last few months of life, which is overwhelmingly medicare.
     
  23. WillReadmore

    WillReadmore Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 21, 2013
    Messages:
    59,473
    Likes Received:
    16,351
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Obama wanted a single payer system.

    Analysis showed that Republicans would be able to kill that.

    Progress gets made in stages. The ACA was a large step forward in that it protected the insured from having insurane companies dump them if they got sick, stopped the insurance company practice of denying insurance to those with preexistin conditions (including stuff like easily treatable hypertensions), and providing a way for most of those on low income could become covered. Plus, there were improvements in Medicare/Mediaid. It also included a public insurance option that would operate in competition with commercial insurance companies - but, it had to be removed in order to pass.

    Given that the populace was NOT in favor of single payer at that time, that was a plenty large step.

    Interestingly, Americans were VERY excited about the features the ACA provided, but Republicans put major money into attacking the ACA - which worked well enough for Republicans to follow their leadership.
     
  24. WillReadmore

    WillReadmore Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 21, 2013
    Messages:
    59,473
    Likes Received:
    16,351
    Trophy Points:
    113
    OH good lord.

    You dump hate on Democrats when it is Republicans who are the ones fighting against Democrati process.

    Sorry, but that's just plain silly.

    The more Dems you dump on, the less likely Dems will be able to promote anything. This is a democracy, annd that's the way congress works.
     
  25. LafayetteBis

    LafayetteBis Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Oct 24, 2016
    Messages:
    9,744
    Likes Received:
    2,086
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    You seem to think that speaking out loud in a forum is necessary to "make a problem" real and obvious. Is that what you mean?

    Stick around - if I post on this forum the economic data that supports my arguments then you are obliged to refute them. But not with sarcasm. With real, factual evidence.

    There is little room for sarcasm as a rebuttal in serious debate ...
     
    Last edited: Feb 2, 2020

Share This Page