Healthcare

[wgdsr]

can you quote where you get your number on almost all places less than half? i saw u.s is $11k + per capita. and spending more for healthcare is bad?

canada that brook quoted, per fraser institute is at 21 weeks for necessary procedures and healthcare. not elective. average. do you find that to be the case in your experience?

i can read that you have to claim a gp (looked at 5 countries) and then you are at their discretion for referrals. and that in most of these countries, physicians put in their minimum time for state run stuff and prioritize private where they can get paid.

do i think most people that spout off about state run success are people that maybe haven't done homework? i do. is our own healthcare system a win across the board? no.

do we have something to lose if we nick (maybe a lot) innovation by cutting biotech's ability to get paid on drug and other co's medical advancement development? we do. imo.

do i wish for and hope for an equitable solution that serves us all? i do.

Per Capita Spending: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_c ... per_capita - every country except 3 are 58% of our costs or less per capita (I'll change my statement to "close to half" since I was just eyeballing it at first). And the other three are still a couple thousand less per capita.

And yes, I think spending that much more to end up with a pretty unhealthy population vs. those countries that spend much less is bad. Just getting people out of the ER and getting them preventative care will save us a lot of money.

As far as wait times in Canada, that wait for medically necessary procedures varies widely by area and what procedure you need, that's why they used "average". Obviously emergencies are seen immediately, and things like oncology treatments begin pretty quickly, whereas necessary but not threatening issues you hop into the queue (and jump ahead if it becomes more serious). Do you have a similar analysis of US wait times to that Fraser institute study? Would love to compare. From a quick search a few countries have faster wait times than the US for various things even with a universal system.

And of course in the US, if you can't afford that medically necessary procedure, then the wait time is until it becomes life threatening and you go to the ER. Not really comparable in that regards.


I will echo Brooklyn's question - what improvements would you make to get more people coverage, save money and prevent medical bankruptcies? I've got a few suggestions to work within the current system before switching over to a universal insurance system, but we don't seem to hear a lot of suggestions from people who like the current system over a universal system.

I will say we have a pretty great system for the wealthy, as a fan mentioned.

all due respect to wiki and before we get started on the rest, your link doesn't represent "our costs" for healthcare to live and be healthy. it's a healthcare industry total as a % of gdp. includes research and dev and who knows what else. we should stop innovating to cut costs vs other nations' gdp %?

[CU77]

We all know the free market doesn't work for health care.

Free market for health care works perfectly fine, AS LONG AS we're prepared to let people who can't afford care for disease/injury X to suffer miserably and possibly die of disease/injury X.

The was how human societies worked for thousands of years.

And this is how Republicans would like it to be again. Because they believe net dollar worth is a good and accurate measure of intrinsic human worth.

But they know they can't come out and say all that quite so clearly.

[wgdsr]

all sounds great in the land of unicorns.

It's not the land of unicorns. It's the international that I compete in, every single day. Right now.

where do they have dental covered?

Germany and Austria, for starters. But that's sort of missing the point, don't you think? Who needs dental care if they can't afford a plain ol' doctor when needed?

so you have stats on what a 5 month delay on necessary healthcare does to 331 million people vs the group that you say won't go to get looked at? of course you don't.

You want to go back and forth on this? Okay.

Are you looking at total cost? So for example-----Americans blow about $10 per capita for our health care per year. Canada? A little over half that amount. So if we switched to Canada's system, and blew a whopping $4k more per capita? Ya think we could get the wait times slashed?

You betcha.

we need to have a real conversation and solution. but we won't.

Happy to discuss all you like. But the REASON we can't have a discussion in Congress is that we still have Republican Congressmen (all with .gov paid health care, naturally) who are pretending that the free market still works for health care. Once they stop pretending? We can get to work crafting a system that works. Until then? Your's truly gets the best care money can buy. All while the bulk of TrumpLand (rural America) is closing hospitals faster than Trump can say "Mexico will pay for it".

We all know the free market doesn't work for health care. So instead of acknowledging that, we pretend like getting a workable health care system is just impossible, and so we've given up so much as trying. We landed on the moon, and we can't figure out health care? Really?

you said blow. holmes just threw a link to me about total health care expenditure for the industry (not what it costs each citizen). where do you get your stats? link?

should i assume you don't have a study on wait time reduction?

[Brooklyn]

actually, i thought you had proferred. i didn't. ̶ ̶5̶ ̶m̶o̶n̶t̶h̶s̶ ̶w̶a̶i̶t̶ seems good by you for necessary healthcare. you said that was working great. not me. your "reforms" that we pay thru gov't solves anything and everything bc you're altruistic and others aren't look to be tbd.

5 minute wait is preferred

[holmes435]

all due respect to wiki and before we get started on the rest, your link doesn't represent "our costs" for healthcare to live and be healthy. it's a healthcare industry total as a % of gdp. includes research and dev and who knows what else. we should stop innovating to cut costs vs other nations' gdp %?

It's comparing similar spending with every other country in there. Here is the breakdown of that number: The U.S. spends twice as much as comparable countries on health, driven mostly by higher payments to hospitals and physicians

All that R&D & innovation and what else? Not the big piece of the puzzle (~13%). It's possible to keep that exactly the same if you want and still improve the system a ton.

AGAIN, what do you propose to make the system work better, or are you ok with it as-is? You have a lot of people in this thread willing to have that conversation you assume people don't want to have, but we're not hearing much as to what you think that should be.

[wgdsr]

actually, i thought you had proferred. i didn't. ̶ ̶5̶ ̶m̶o̶n̶t̶h̶s̶ ̶w̶a̶i̶t̶ seems good by you for necessary healthcare. you said that was working great. not me. your "reforms" that we pay thru gov't solves anything and everything bc you're altruistic and others aren't look to be tbd.

5 minute wait is preferred

https://www.fraserinstitute.org/categor ... wait-times

i prefer ____ jobs with my eggs benedict when i wake up at 5 star hotels.
we can't always get what we want. mick taught me that.

[a fan]

where do you get your stats? link?

I'll make it easier for you.

YOU choose the per Country stats for both costs and health outcomes. And that's what we'll work with, and discuss this over a dram, like gentlemen.

should i assume you don't have a study on wait time reduction?

From which country? Happy to give it. Canada has the most data on it, if that's what you want to see....

But what are we going to use to compare it to, when millions of Americans don't get access to a "wait time" at all?

[wgdsr]

where do you get your stats? link?

I'll make it easier for you.

YOU choose the per Country stats for both costs and health outcomes. And that's what we'll work with, and discuss this over a dram, like gentlemen.

should i assume you don't have a study on wait time reduction?

From which country? Happy to give it. Canada has the most data on it, if that's what you want to see....

But what are we going to use to compare it to, when millions of Americans don't get access to a "wait time" at all?

that's an easy conversation for you. you jumped in with proclamations and then i should prove them wrong? neat trick.

i just posted a link for brooks on your canada wait times. never tried to get necessary healthcare in canada, so don't know how true it is. seems sciencey. i do know i,'ve been fortunate enough to not have to wait 5 or 8 months for stuff i or any of my family or relatives or friends have needed. fortunate.

the 10%? or more? percent that we need to work a solution for matter. we seem to disagree on who should be delivering the 100%.

[a fan]

that's an easy conversation for you. you jumped in with proclamations and then i should prove them wrong? neat trick.

That's not what I was doing at all. I was letting you set the parameters for the discussion, with the understanding that we could compare apples to apples. Would you prefer I set where we get the data from?

i just posted a link for brooks on your canada wait times. never tried to get necessary healthcare in canada, so don't know how true it is. seems sciencey. i do know i,'ve been fortunate enough to not have to wait 5 or 8 months for stuff i or any of my family or relatives or friends have needed. fortunate.

I think you're missing what I'm saying. How do you track what wait times are, when millions of Americans can't afford to see a doctor? My point is: there isn't a corollary in America vs., say, Canada. Because how do you account for Americans who don't go to a doctor because they know they can't afford the visit?

As I said before, I have zero doubt that my family and I get the best possible heath care. "Better" doesn't exist for me and my family. Of course, it helps to live with a wife with a Masters in Public Health, but still....it's about money.

What I want, is for everyone to have DECENT health care. That's not happening right now. And believe it or not, I'm open to pretty much any idea. They only idea I KNOW doesn't work is free market health care. The American poor simply can't afford free market care. Heck, all but the top 10% earners can't afford free market care when they hit the age of 65. And the ENTIRE American health care market is being propped up by Medicare. Without Medicare? Premiums for the under-65 set would be triple what we pay now.

the 10%? or more? percent that we need to work a solution for matter. we seem to disagree on who should be delivering the 100%.

Well, I'm about 99.999% certain that you received health care from a government doctor and/or trainer during your four years at school. How was that socialized medical experience?

Are you SURE we disagree as to how do deliver that care?

[wgdsr]

that's an easy conversation for you. you jumped in with proclamations and then i should prove them wrong? neat trick.

That's not what I was doing at all. I was letting you set the parameters for the discussion, with the understanding that we could compare apples to apples. Would you prefer I set where we get the data from?

ummm... you said that we would have no problem reducing 5 months ave wait time for essential procedures because... money. you underatand for every 3 month wait there's a 7 month wait, right? you waive it away like it means jack and can just be executed without a blip bc... well i don't know why. just because. it doesn't work like that in the real world. and you know that.

where's the study on doctors and nurses taking a 30% haircut? how does that work out? or, look at canada, eh?

i just posted a link for brooks on your canada wait times. never tried to get necessary healthcare in canada, so don't know how true it is. seems sciencey. i do know i,'ve been fortunate enough to not have to wait 5 or 8 months for stuff i or any of my family or relatives or friends have needed. fortunate.

I think you're missing what I'm saying. How do you track what wait times are, when millions of Americans can't afford to see a doctor? My point is: there isn't a corollary in America vs., say, Canada. Because how do you account for Americans who don't go to a doctor because they know they can't afford the visit?"

i'm not missing what you're saying. you said wait times would be greatly reduced by spending dollars we're spending now on reducing wait times. wait times that we don't have right now. i do understand the interjection of folks that aren't "waiting", but you conveniently have no actual solution for those that will develop issues for this new plan.

As I said before, I have zero doubt that my family and I get the best possible heath care. "Better" doesn't exist for me and my family. Of course, it helps to live with a wife with a Masters in Public Health, but still....it's about money.

What I want, is for everyone to have DECENT health care. That's not happening right now. And believe it or not, I'm open to pretty much any idea. They only idea I KNOW doesn't work is free market health care. The American poor simply can't afford free market care. Heck, all but the top 10% earners can't afford free market care when they hit the age of 65. And the ENTIRE American health care market is being propped up by Medicare. Without Medicare? Premiums for the under-65 set would be triple what we pay now.

should i assume from this that you think i'd like everyone to have decent healthcare also? or that i don't? maybe i just don't think delivering 100% from usa is the best way to go?

the 10%? or more? percent that we need to work a solution for matter. we seem to disagree on who should be delivering the 100%.

Well, I'm about 99.999% certain that you received health care from a government doctor and/or trainer during your four years at school. How was that socialized medical experience?
+¹1¹
Are you SURE we disagree as to how do deliver that care?

should i start replying to these posts that you should give up ownership of your biz to the govt for a fair salary?

how you feel about that?

are doctors and hospitals raping people? they are. it's sad. enough to pay for this already. all levels of demographics get caught in a healthcare spiral.
lower incomes have it worst.

what's the #1 reason why healthcare (and not, say, spirits) should be taken over by the government? be precise.

[Brooklyn]

https://www.fraserinstitute.org/categor ... wait-times

i prefer ____ jobs with my eggs benedict when i wake up at 5 star hotels.
we can't always get what we want. mick taught me that.

When a company takes such deductions on its corporate business expense form that constitutes food stamps for the rich.

[wgdsr]

https://www.fraserinstitute.org/categor ... wait-times

i prefer ____ jobs with my eggs benedict when i wake up at 5 star hotels.
we can't always get what we want. mick taught me that.

When a company takes such deductions on its corporate business expense form that constitutes food stamps for the rich.

i agree. should we be talking about tax reform?

[a fan]

ummm... you said that we would have no problem reducing 5 months ave wait time for essential procedures because... money. you underatand for every 3 month wait there's a 7 month wait, right? you waive it away like it means jack and can just be executed without a blip bc... well i don't know why.

Because in your example, the citizens of Canada are making a choice as to how long of a wait is acceptable. They can get shorter wait times by purchasing more health care capacity. Remember, I run a factory. How do I increase my capacity? Simple: money.

If Canadians think that the wait times are too long? They'll increase taxes, buy more health infrastructure, and voila, shorter wait times. The fact that they haven't done that, coupled with surveys saying they are happy with their health care is telling.

And remember, they're spending about half as much as we are for care. So by comparison, they have room for choices. Pretty good place to be.

where's the study on doctors and nurses taking a 30% haircut? how does that work out? or, look at canada, eh?

Where's the study on how long it takes US nurses and doctors to pay off their med school loans vs. Canadians?

Things aren't all equal.

....but you conveniently have no actual solution for those that will develop issues for this new plan.

Sure I did. You simply spend more. We had this discussion about the Department of Motor Vehicles. People grumble about inefficiencies. My response is: you get what you pay for. If you want a DMV rep to show up at your house and work through your paperwork with you, we can do that. You just have to pay taxes for it. It's up to the taxpayers as to how much service they want.

should i assume from this that you think i'd like everyone to have decent healthcare also?

Of course I do!

maybe i just don't think delivering 100% from usa is the best way to go?

Great! I'm cool with that. And I'm 1000% ok with Trumpcare, or RepublicaCare, or anyone else who has a way to deliver better care. But I've been waiting since Clinton took office for the Free Market Solution crowd to show up, and give us the free market solution. I'm still waiting.

And imho, there ISN"T a free market solution. It's impossible. And that's why every other 1st world nation offers some sort of government solution.

But I'm all ears if you have a way to do it.

should i start replying to these posts that you should give up ownership of your biz to the govt for a fair salary?

No. But I think that you should realize that you have enjoyed .gov health care in the past. And that care was as good as it gets. UMich, UMd, UCLA Med Center, NYU Langone......all world class, as good as it gets hospitals. All owned and operated by the government.

Seems like it's possible to have world class government care, right here in the US of A, don't you think? Doesn't this obvious point make you think?

what's the #1 reason why healthcare (and not, say, spirits) should be taken over by the government? be precise.

Simple. The American free market has failed to provide 1st world health care to America's citizens. Full stop. And secondly, were paying twice as much for this failure. So the outcome is bad, and we're paying roughly twice as much as other countries are for said failure.

That's it. But if you can accomplish the goal of providing 1st world health care to all our citizens using Free Market care? Fan-freaking-tastic. Sign me up. And the market has had several decades to figure it out. How much longer do they get to fix the problem?

[cradleandshoot]

ummm... you said that we would have no problem reducing 5 months ave wait time for essential procedures because... money. you underatand for every 3 month wait there's a 7 month wait, right? you waive it away like it means jack and can just be executed without a blip bc... well i don't know why.

Because in your example, the citizens of Canada are making a choice as to how long of a wait is acceptable. They can get shorter wait times by purchasing more health care capacity. Remember, I run a factory. How do I increase my capacity? Simple: money.

If Canadians think that the wait times are too long? They'll increase taxes, buy more health infrastructure, and voila, shorter wait times. The fact that they haven't done that, coupled with surveys saying they are happy with their health care is telling.

And remember, they're spending about half as much as we are for care. So by comparison, they have room for choices. Pretty good place to be.

where's the study on doctors and nurses taking a 30% haircut? how does that work out? or, look at canada, eh?

Where's the study on how long it takes US nurses and doctors to pay off their med school loans vs. Canadians?

Things aren't all equal.

....but you conveniently have no actual solution for those that will develop issues for this new plan.

Sure I did. You simply spend more. We had this discussion about the Department of Motor Vehicles. People grumble about inefficiencies. My response is: you get what you pay for. If you want a DMV rep to show up at your house and work through your paperwork with you, we can do that. You just have to pay taxes for it. It's up to the taxpayers as to how much service they want.

should i assume from this that you think i'd like everyone to have decent healthcare also?

Of course I do!

maybe i just don't think delivering 100% from usa is the best way to go?

Great! I'm cool with that. And I'm 1000% ok with Trumpcare, or RepublicaCare, or anyone else who has a way to deliver better care. But I've been waiting since Clinton took office for the Free Market Solution crowd to show up, and give us the free market solution. I'm still waiting.

And imho, there ISN"T a free market solution. It's impossible. And that's why every other 1st world nation offers some sort of government solution.

But I'm all ears if you have a way to do it.

should i start replying to these posts that you should give up ownership of your biz to the govt for a fair salary?

No. But I think that you should realize that you have enjoyed .gov health care in the past. And that care was as good as it gets. UMich, UMd, UCLA Med Center, NYU Langone......all world class, as good as it gets hospitals. All owned and operated by the government.

Seems like it's possible to have world class government care, right here in the US of A, don't you think? Doesn't this obvious point make you think?

what's the #1 reason why healthcare (and not, say, spirits) should be taken over by the government? be precise.

Simple. The American free market has failed to provide 1st world health care to America's citizens. Full stop. And secondly, were paying twice as much for this failure. So the outcome is bad, and we're paying roughly twice as much as other countries are for said failure.

That's it. But if you can accomplish the goal of providing 1st world health care to all our citizens using Free Market care? Fan-freaking-tastic. Sign me up. And the market has had several decades to figure it out. How much longer do they get to fix the problem?

So where does the bottomless pit full of money come from? To provide free health care to 320 million people will never happen the way you expect. We now move back to the topic that sets some peoples hair on fire... death panels. Free health care can not save everybody. Who in government will draw the line on what the health care ROI will be? BHO told that young woman a few years back what the deal will be. She asked about her 80 year old grandmother that needed a pacemaker. BHO in an unexpected bout of blunt honesty told her that possibly the best treatment she could be given would be pain meds so she could die quietly. Free health care will turn into the same thing we have today with the health insurance companies. Some entity will be forced to triage every patient and sort through the people that can be helped and the people that are beyond help. The bright side is the government can provide the free morphine drip as the dying patient gets ready to exit stage left.

https://www.realclearpolitics.com/video ... rgery.html

[holmes435]

So where does the bottomless pit full of money come from? To provide free health care to 320 million people will never happen the way you expect. We now move back to the topic that sets some peoples hair on fire... death panels. Free health care can not save everybody. Who in government will draw the line on what the health care ROI will be? BHO told that young woman a few years back what the deal will be. She asked about her 80 year old grandmother that needed a pacemaker. BHO in an unexpected bout of blunt honesty told her that possibly the best treatment she could be given would be pain meds so she could die quietly. Free health care will turn into the same thing we have today with the health insurance companies. Some entity will be forced to triage every patient and sort through the people that can be helped and the people that are beyond help. The bright side is the government can provide the free morphine drip as the dying patient gets ready to exit stage left.

https://www.realclearpolitics.com/video ... rgery.html

Why would death panels set people's hair on fire? We've had death panels since the start of the healthcare industry and deal with them every day.

- "Your plan doesn't cover this procedure"
- "Your plan doesn't cover this medicine"
- "You don't have money to pay for this? I'm sorry, we can't help you"
- "You have one health insurance provider in your area, so good luck shopping around"

The good news? If you have money in a universal system, you can pay out the rear to your heart's desire for private care to avoid those death panels, just like you can right now.

Do you want your death panels accountable, or do you want your death panels hidden away in some private for-profit company? You are a fan of "follow the money" right? Well the money is pushing this phony death panel boogeyman scare tactic because they don't want their unnecessary middleman cash cow to disappear. Death panels aren't some huge issue in every other modern country that has a universal system.

[wgdsr]

all due respect to wiki and before we get started on the rest, your link doesn't represent "our costs" for healthcare to live and be healthy. it's a healthcare industry total as a % of gdp. includes research and dev and who knows what else. we should stop innovating to cut costs vs other nations' gdp %?

It's comparing similar spending with every other country in there. Here is the breakdown of that number: The U.S. spends twice as much as comparable countries on health, driven mostly by higher payments to hospitals and physicians

All that R&D & innovation and what else? Not the big piece of the puzzle (~13%). It's possible to keep that exactly the same if you want and still improve the system a ton.

AGAIN, what do you propose to make the system work better, or are you ok with it as-is? You have a lot of people in this thread willing to have that conversation you assume people don't want to have, but we're not hearing much as to what you think that should be.

thanks for that. i'm not smart enough or know enough about it to make a proposal.
i posted simply to challenge the idea that it's one big rosy set up. you just commented on "death panels". i believe a 5 month wait (with 50% of people waiting longer) is just one aspect that could be... very, very problematic.

a bi-furcated system where the majority takes state care and a minority takes high-end care would potentially be even more elitist.

the biggest thing to me is taking x problem and prescribing 10x solution. and by the govt no less. do you think that 3.5 trillion dollar annual ticket is getting paid for? of course not. so while that's cool for you me probably, that's a much larger problem in 10- 20 years and more for a generation or 2 below. imo.

gun to my head, maybe something that clinton & co did in the early 90s. expand kick-ins to medicare (1%? 2%). and have an agency that becomes the younger medicare advocate/insurer. not only for pricing in and out but to ensure that it doesn't become some poor man's option in coverage.

[cradleandshoot]

So where does the bottomless pit full of money come from? To provide free health care to 320 million people will never happen the way you expect. We now move back to the topic that sets some peoples hair on fire... death panels. Free health care can not save everybody. Who in government will draw the line on what the health care ROI will be? BHO told that young woman a few years back what the deal will be. She asked about her 80 year old grandmother that needed a pacemaker. BHO in an unexpected bout of blunt honesty told her that possibly the best treatment she could be given would be pain meds so she could die quietly. Free health care will turn into the same thing we have today with the health insurance companies. Some entity will be forced to triage every patient and sort through the people that can be helped and the people that are beyond help. The bright side is the government can provide the free morphine drip as the dying patient gets ready to exit stage left.

https://www.realclearpolitics.com/video ... rgery.html

Why would death panels set people's hair on fire? We've had death panels since the start of the healthcare industry and deal with them every day.

- "Your plan doesn't cover this procedure"
- "Your plan doesn't cover this medicine"
- "You don't have money to pay for this? I'm sorry, we can't help you"
- "You have one health insurance provider in your area, so good luck shopping around"

The good news? If you have money in a universal system, you can pay out the rear to your heart's desire for private care to avoid those death panels, just like you can right now.

Do you want your death panels accountable, or do you want your death panels hidden away in some private for-profit company? You are a fan of "follow the money" right? Well the money is pushing this phony death panel boogeyman scare tactic because they don't want their unnecessary middleman cash cow to disappear. Death panels aren't some huge issue in every other modern country that has a universal system.

Who are the "death panels" going to be accountable to in a universal health care system? The folks in charge of universal health care are now judge, jury and executioner. You really need to be careful about what your asking for. You folks are so enamored at the concept of "free medical care" that you lose sight of the quality of the care you will receive. This may be anecdotal but the 3 years i spent in the US Army at Ft Bragg there is one fact any soldier in our division understood... NEVER GO TO WOMACK ARMY HOSPITAL UNLESS YOU WERE DYING. If you were actually dying, the folks at Womack would expedite the process for you. It was FREE medical care, it was also substandard and incompetent medical care. That is what free gets you... exactly what you paid for.

This is my wifes take on the future of medical care in our country. She has been an RN for 40 years. She works with the next generation of doctors and nurses. Take it for whatever you wish. A patient came in to her facility 2 weeks ago for a colonoscopy. My wife went to assist the admitting nurse. The admitting nurse missed the fact the patient had a heart rate over 140 and had a heart arrhythmia. The 20 years my wife has been an RN in the gastroenterology unit this automatically made you unqualified to have a procedure. No GI doc is going to scope a patient with an arrhythmia. The nurse that was admitting never even documented it on the patients chart. My wife went to her her boss who told her to talk to the physician doing the procedure. My wife went to that doctor. The doctor looked at the EKG strip and said the heart rate was okay now and the patient had a cardiologist. It was okay to bring the patient in for the procedure.

My wife would have refused to be in the room doing the procedure. The risk of the patient coding on the table could not be justified. To ease her conscience she talked about this instance with one of the GI docs she had worked with and known for many years. He was stunned that any doctor would take such a risk, he would not have done the procedure. Welcome to the new age of free medicine. These are the people that are in training today that will be your "free medicine" docs. With "free medicine" to we also qualify for free "undertaking" Who do you sue for malpractice in the world of free medicine? Our legal eagles on this forum should be very interested there. Is the patient suppose to sue the government run health care system? Good luck with that.

[dislaxxic]

As seems the case most of the time, you are hopelessly hung up on the extreme edges of this issue, Cradle. You constantly hurl around comments like "free healthcare for all" and "socialized medicine" and "bottomless pit of money" and on and on. You don't seem to get that Mitch and the other "conservatives" in the Congress are there to take the rough, sharp edges off the CONCEPT of universal healthcare to help improve the overall delivery of healthcare services to our citizenry...hopefully by starting to fine tune the Affordable Care Act in that direction. Try easing off the extremist fear mongering rhetoric for a moment and explain for us (i know i'll regret this) how your cautionary tale about Mrs. Cradle's experience with the colonoscopy patient argues against finding a way to make a universal-like system work in our country...

..

[cradleandshoot]

As seems the case most of the time, you are hopelessly hung up on the extreme edges of this issue, Cradle. You constantly hurl around comments like "free healthcare for all" and "socialized medicine" and "bottomless pit of money" and on and on. You don't seem to get that Mitch and the other "conservatives" in the Congress are there to take the rough, sharp edges off the CONCEPT of universal healthcare to help improve the overall delivery of healthcare services to our citizenry...hopefully by starting to fine tune the Affordable Care Act in that direction. Try easing off the extremist fear mongering rhetoric for a moment and explain for us (i know i'll regret this) how your cautionary tale about Mrs. Cradle's experience with the colonoscopy patient argues against finding a way to make a universal-like system work in our country...

..

I suggest you go to Womack Army Hospital for you next physical. Maybe you could come up here in Upstate NY and let them stick the scope up your ass. You overdue for your colorectal exam? I am not saying anything more than the up and coming new generation of doctors and nurses may not have the higher standards of 20 years ago. I hope yer ticker is okay. My wife is dealing with this generation of new nurses and doctors every day. She ain't impressed. Who would you rather have in YOUR room Dis when they are sticking the scope up your ass? Would you prefer my wife or the brandy new nursing school graduate that can't put in an IV and can't see a heart arrhythmia on an EKG... your call yellow man.

[a fan]

thanks for that. i'm not smart enough or know enough about it to make a proposal.

Oh, you're plenty smart enough. That much is clear. As I keep saying, there's a REASON no one has come up with a free market solution to providing health care to an entire population. It's simple: that solution doesn't exist.

i posted simply to challenge the idea that it's one big rosy set up. you just commented on "death panels". i believe a 5 month wait (with 50% of people waiting longer) is just one aspect that could be... very, very problematic.

This is the part I don't understand. What makes you think that that wait is baked into any system we choose?

a bi-furcated system where the majority takes state care and a minority takes high-end care would potentially be even more elitist.

More elitist than what we have now? Disagree.

do you think that 3.5 trillion dollar annual ticket is getting paid for? of course not. so while that's cool for you me probably, that's a much larger problem in 10- 20 years and more for a generation or 2 below. imo.

The problem here is that you're forgetting that this is what's happening right now. For every dollar put into Medicare, Americans are taking $3 out. So you can't point to our current system, and act like it's running on a balanced budget. It's not. And with each passing year, we're borrowing more and more money to give care to our seniors.

So did you know that total Medicare spending was $644 Billion? Well, do you also know what we blew on payments on interest for all that borrowing?

$591 Billion in 2019. So we're just shy of paying more interest on borrowing money than we are paying for Medicare in its entirety. So asking 'where is the monty going to come from" completely ignores that the CURRENT Health Care system isn't working financially.

We have a nation of Americans who don't want to pay for what they are getting. And any time you mention raising taxes to a reasonable level? This group of Americans trots out silliness like "you want to punish success" or "these corporations create jobs 'therefore' you can't tax them" or "I'm taxed too much as it is".

But when they turn 65? Oh, you better have their health care waiting for them. And you better educate their kids for free. And have State Universities at the ready. And have bailouts when pandemics hit.

IMHO, as is with the Pandemic? We have an unfixable cultural problem in America. They want the government out of their lives....right before they turn to the government for everything-----education, infrastructure, health care, subsidies, tax breaks, and on and on. We cannot manage a government with this cultural attitude. It doesn't work.