DawgTalkers.net Forums DawgTalk Palus Politicus Single-payer would tank the US economy

First, I'm not ignoring anything. I've read over the numbers and the budget/tax predictions from both sides. Truth is You are already paying for health care for ALL one way or the other. BUT right now a bunch of insurance fat cats and middle men siphon off 30% of the money just to handle the billing. That same process under medicare cost 8.9% So there is already an extra 20% to work with. Then when the WHOLE country is being covered prices can be negotiated down or medicines, supplies, medical devices, and procedures. Doctors and hospitals will no longer have to chase payments and have 100s or 1000s of payers that have to be billed with different processes and claim forms. SIMPLIFICATION = more savings.

Now a lot of insurance people and billing people will lose jobs but jobs like radiologist, phlebotomist, nurses, doctors and nurse practitioners, will open up! I'd like more healthcare for our bucks!

Then you take into consideration that you save 100% of your premiums, deductibles and copays that you currently are paying, but pay more in taxes. Many families might actually pay less, about the same or just a little more. Businesses will no longer be tied to healthcare making jobs more competitive and wages go up. There are a ton of benefits to this.

My Wife uses the VA covered 100%. It's already like this. I can go to any hospital, any pharmacy, any doctor if I want to... or I can use the VA staff. I can either use the VA or any hospital under my coverage.

In a few years I will have 100% coverage via the VA. So I'm not really worried about me anymore. But I've had to deal with pre-existing conditions, been uninsured or forced to pay for family insurance that was only used for me. ACA didn't help us at all in that regard but it did force insurance companies to cover people like me as an individual without going through my wife's work and having to insure her too when she already has 100% coverage due to her VA disability.

So I'm already very familiar with what the government CAN DO and it's pretty damn good to be honest.

We are already seeing the problem with single payer insurance. The system is overburdened with medicare/medicaid people that run to an emergency room with every little ailment or primal urge. People that want free meals and a warm bed know all they have to do is run to the hospital and say that they are suicidal or have chest pain. Antisocial types are attracted because they know that about the only place they can get their fix to abuse other human beings without consequence is in a healthcare setting. None of these folks are going to a clinic, physicians office or urgent care center with a minor ailment, they're going to a hospital emergency room. The sense of entitlement our welfare system has created will never allow a single payer healthcare plan to work in our country as it does in others. All of this stuff is happening now, and the opiate addiction problem compounding the problem.

When is the last time you've been in an emergency room?

When I was there pre-ACA it was packed.

After ACA I was there are few times for kidney stones.

It was a ghost town.

Mind you, the service wasn't any better. But nobody was there but me and a couple other people.

So I have to say bull that the ACA made people go to ER for everything.

Also, in my town, an urgent care center opened. They don't handle trauma stuff, but for bumps and bruises they are great. When I had shingles, I went in, the Dr saw me and gave prescriptions and it cost me only 10 bucks.

10 bucks!!!!!!

So, yeah, not every thing need to go to ER and people are finding other alternatives. And cheap healthcare is possible.

And the whole, "ER drives the costs up" is a bunch of bunk. Unless lack of customers drives the costs up.

One of the problems I have is that I don't see any temperance in regards to the expectations of just what a system is supposed to provide us. To me it appears that the expectation is that everyone will have the equivalent of a Cadillac Plan. And if I'm misreading that, then where is the line?

If I suddenly get diagnosed with Stage 3/4 cancer with a very bleak prognosis, will I get every procedure and treatment available?

If I'm 80 and my heart isn't ticking as well, but I'm a helluva a guy to have around, will I be eligible for a heart transplant even though I'm already past the average life expectancy for a man?

And what happens if we run in to a situation like Charlie Gard? Our own healthcare system says there's nothing else to do, but we've privately raised the funds to take our kid to someone who might provide a Hail Mary attempt. What is our recourse when the gov't terminates our parental Rights because they don't approve?


I just wish the folks advocating for this kind of system would spend a little time contemplating what happens when the system tells them No. I was a young Devilpup in the 90's, but I remember that people hated HMO's because bureaucrats and bean counters were denying people care that they needed because it didn't fit within their cost/benefit analysis.

The other thing I'd like to know, and I still have yet to see defined, is just what constitutes "quality" health care.

The other thing that worries me is just how far are people willing to go to enforce such a thing? I'm already very troubled by how accepting people were of the fines and possible imprisonment (cuz that's what happens when you don't pay your taxes) for those who didn't comply with the Individual Mandate in the ACA. The more authority you give the gov't, the greater the mechanism it requires in order to enforce it's mandates. There's a real Civil Rights discussion to be had and worked out before implementing anything like this.

Yeah, for real, these people are bat crazy if they want to give our government more money in tax dollars and actually think they'll do something smart with it. Also when people say it will work that still boggles my mind.

It may work for a small subset, but the system side effects suck. All it takes is, start 50 or so years ago, examine the national healthcare system over in the UK, look at what they have over in Sweden, Denmark, Canada as well. Uncover the tax increases over time, shortages, incorrect supply towards demand issue, and after seeing all those things, no one in the their right mind would want that system.

The further price control and system moves away from the free market determining everything, you're screwed because you leave it up to the government and "planners" to try and decide or influence things. That doesn't work because no matter how much data a group may have, its never all the data, and this leads to the information problem. While there are some controls in place with the free market, a lot of it acts by itself. Having a socialism (which leads to communism) society interferes with that natural motion.

That's just my opinion through the education I've had in my economics courses and research. For the life of me, I just can't understand why people want to pay more in taxes, and then actually trust they will be spent smartly. Whether a democrat or republican is in power, the government never knows what they're doing related to spending and setting up programs wisely. Well, maybe except the military, but most other programs they set up are usually on the verge of bankruptcy or will be bankrupt in 30 years like social security.

Pricing for drugs? Try this....any drug that uses any public money in the R&D including work done at universities that receive any public money or use students that receive any public assistance must be sold to US citizens at the lowest price the company sells the drug to anywhere else in the world...what this will do is lower US costs....but it will raise costs to other countries because they won’t sell pills to Canada for $1 if tgat is the floor for US payers....this forces other countries to pay to play....kinda like the NATO agreement that Trump is enforcing..

i love how you posted this as if the other countries are simply gonna roll over and be like "yea its all good, just raise the prices for my country, its cool".

lol, come on dude.

Yesterday. I work in a hospital. For personal reasons, a month ago when I conked my head in a bike accident.



Our ER still gets overrun with people abusing the system. We too have multiple urgent care, clinic and doctor's office options....but people still run to the ER. Our ER use hasn't dropped due to ACA.



People that have copays (including myself) are using urgent care centers. I also have a 10 dollar copay at urgent care, it's more convenient for me and my family to go there vs. our family doctor. However, there is no deterrent for those with no copay (Medicare/Medicaid/"self pay") to seek out these other options and they don't.



Again, we're not seeing a lack of customers, and the cost of treating minor ailments in the ER vs a clinic is much more expensive.

The truth of the matter is that people like you and I that have copays (my ER copay is 200 dollars vs the 10 for urgent care and 15 for PCP visit) are going to seek out the more efficient option. People that don't run to the ER. I see it and deal with it every day.

Maybe the people in my town are smarter than the people in your town.

Go to ER for a problem = Thousands of dollars in bills.
Go to Urgent Care for a problem = 10 Bucks.

It's a no brainer.

There's a very good chance that is a correct statement.



You left out the part about who pays those bills. If nothing's coming out of their own pocket, they go to the ER.

I don't know if I have a point here or not, but let me expound on this.

Almost 2 years ago, I hurt my foot. It was a Friday night after the h.s. football game, at a friends house, in their new 'barn', which has a 3/4 court basketball floor in it.

Long story short, by Sunday, I decided to go to the urgent care center. I couldn't walk. I'd been checking about bruised calcaneus', broken, etc. As I need my feet for my job, I finally decided to go.

Walked in, told the nurse/registerer, whatever she was: I need my foot x-rayed. (explained what had happened) And I asked "how much is it for an x-ray?


Her reply was: I don't know. It depends on if the doctor thinks you need an x-ray. And, it depends on if you have insurance or not."



WHAT??????


Well, as it turns out, the doctor, get this: determined I needed an x ray. So, it was done. Luckily for me, it was just a bruised calcaneus. (I wouldn't wish that pain on anyone - for the most part)

So, how much do I owe? Doc said "I don't know, do you have insurance?"

In my state the medicaid plan is $25 copay for a visit to a PCP....the ER has no copay....where do you think they go???

And selling cars....how much is that truck??? It depends on if you you are trading something in....$10000 if no trade...$15000 if you trade....but we are giving u $5000 for your $2500 vehicle.

Capitalism at its finest.

"How much do I owe you?"
"How much do you have?"
"This much!"
"What a coincidence. That's the exact cost!"

NP mate. Like I have said before I am a socialist conservative. That means I am pretty liberal on something and pretty conservative on others.

I'm very socialist on things I view as a common need for all citizens like education, healthcare, and safety. When it comes to cultural and religious things I am very conservative. When it comes to business I am somewhere in the middle because I feel for small businesses and strongly dislike most corporations and I don't want either of them free to destroy the environment.

Lol I know I am complicated ^^

There's actually rationale for her questions and answers. If the doctor didn't deem an x-ray necessary and you insisted one was performed, it wouldn't be covered under insurance and either they would refuse to order it or bill you full price. Doctors are very hesitant to do this, because with Medicare/Medicaid and ACA plans it is illegal to bill the patient for a procedure ordered that is not necessary.

If the doctor does find it necessary and orders one, if you have insurance you would be billed the co-pay, which can vary quite a bit between companies (and even between different plans from the same company).

If the doctor orders it and you don't have insurance, you're responsible for the full price. Many times there are discounts and payment plans available for the uninsured.

It takes a billing specialist to figure this stuff out, and office staff don't have the resources to quote prices. She could have been a little more thorough in explaining those variables that can affect the cost to the patient.

Yup, it's a big reason 25 cents of every dollar spent on healthcare is spent on paperwork in the US

https://www.commonwealthfund.org/publica...ight-nations-us

Not really. I feel much the same way as you...

Awesome =)

Is Vers seeing this? I mean he's always advocating it, but is he seeing it?

J/C

Once again with people and their absolutes.

1. You don't know that it would NOT tank the economy because it's never been done before on this scale.
2. You don't know that it WILL tank the economy either for the same reasons.

Just saw a report this morning that income taxes would rise to 70 percent in NY alone. This is when you combine existing taxes with the needed increase to pay for single payer.

Want to work and then give 70% of that income to the Gov?

care to post the report so we can all have a chance to analyze it?

It can work just fine. The problem with reports like that is that they are modeled on unregulated pricing and liability costs. When you stop the crazy pricing for profit and make it nonprofit or low profit at worst then the costs drop dramatically. Unless you think $200 for a single roll of toilet paper is a fair charge from the hospital. Hospitals get away with that nonsense because we are not footing the bill directly. Instead it goes into outrageous insurance premiums that fleece employers and everyone else for insane costs.

First you base what you pay on income. second you regulate prices. Third you limit liability claims to a max amount to protect your doctors and hospitals. It takes all three to make affordable healthcare. It's been proven to work and does work when you do. South Korea has awesome health care doing just that.

Scare tactics for weak minded sheep.

This is how they tax you without taxing you 40. They keep you believing this crap.

What makes you think .gov can regulate pricing in a positive manner. $200 for a roll of TP?? Where do you think they got that idea? Maybe from uncle sam’s Practice of buying $500 hammers and $1000 toilet seats.

And we still ignore the idea that prices on the medical consumer side are high in part because of the low reimbursement rates tied to Medicare and Medicaid. So what happens when everyone is on the low reimbursement rate? Providers dry up and leave. Great plan.

Because medicare and medicaid already do that.

Sorry, Democratic Socialists — you’re still pushing poison

In the crazy, topsy-turvy year of 2018, socialism is somehow on the rise in America. To those of us unfortunate enough to have been born in the Soviet Union, this is troubling.

The new socialists say it’s different this time. They have a new name and everything: “Democratic Socialism.”

Don’t buy it: It’s still based on the same old, failed redistributionist tenets as the old kind — the kind that gave rise to devastating failure in my family homeland.

The second-most famous Democratic Socialist in America right now, after kingmaker Democratic Socialist Bernie Sanders, is New York City congressional candidate Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez. The newcomer does her best to explain the snake oil: It’s “the basic belief” that “in a moral and wealthy America . . . no person should be too poor to live in this country.”

Note the word “wealthy.” How exactly does she think the US got that way? It certainly wasn’t because of socialistic transfers from wealth producers to wealth consumers. In fact, whatever funds are shifted are available only because some Americans are motivated to produce wealth in the first place.

Alas, all that escapes those pushing an economic system that has yet to work anywhere.

Sure, Democratic Socialists take pains to disassociate themselves from the Soviet failure. The Young Democratic Socialists of America website devotes a whole section to why the Soviet Union’s collapse doesn’t discredit their economic model. Yet their ideas just aren’t much different from those that formed the basis for that failed state: “from each according to his ability to each according to his needs.”

The YDSA website even admits that some industries will have to come under government control: “While the large concentrations of capital in industries such as energy and steel may necessitate some form of state ownership, many consumer-goods industries might be best run as cooperatives.”

I happen to know a little something about the transfer of private industry to government control. My grandmother’s father had his bakery seized in the Soviet city of Gomel. He was sent to a gulag, where he then died.

Oh, that’s crazy, Democratic Socialists would respond. No one is planning to seize bakeries. And no one will be sent to prison for owning a business.

No? What if those who own companies in industries that “necessitate some form of state ownership” don’t want to give them up willingly? What happens when the state runs out of money from the industries seized and needs more?

It’s baffling how we can still be considering centralized control of industries when that has never worked anywhere. And how socialism lovers so easily dismiss the underlying foundation in countries that have veered toward some form of that system: capitalism. Countries such as Norway, for example, are helped by a large abundance of natural resources and an essentially capitalist system supporting the welfare state.

On the other hand, nations where socialism continues to wreak havoc and spur poverty, disease and crime, like Venezuela, don’t have much support from capitalism. Fact is, “socialism” only works when it’s paid for by capitalism.

In a 1995 piece on why socialism fails, Mark J. Perry, a professor of economics and finance at the University of Michigan, quoted a Marxist explaining why socialism keeps failing. “The perfect version of socialism would work; it is just the imperfect socialism that doesn’t work. Marxists like to compare a theoretically perfect version of socialism with practical, imperfect capitalism which allows them to claim that socialism is superior to capitalism.”

The Democratic Socialists continue this tradition by denying that the “bureaucratic elites” in the Soviet Union were socialists. Yet the idea that the USSR did not attempt its own form of socialism is a canard — much like the notion that the United States is purely capitalist: Remember, here we have subsidies, tax credits, transfers, welfare and bailouts for companies we consider too big to fail. Somehow, our imperfect capitalism defeats all versions of socialism every time.

In the fall of 1959, Nikita Khrushchev gave a series of speeches here. In one, he said, “We are catching up with you in economic progress, and the time is not far distant when we will move into the lead.” In Russia, that prompted folks to joke: “When we finally catch up to America, can I get off?”

That Democrats and millennials seem to have no idea about the horrors inflicted on the masses in countries like the Soviet Union and want to go in that direction is scary indeed. Let’s just hope the majority of Americans reject that idea. There won’t be anywhere to get off to if we don’t.

https://nypost.com/2018/08/05/sorry-democratic-socialists-youre-still-pushing-poison/

You should know that the old Soviet Union was never even close to a socialist society. It was and still is a ruthless dictatorship underpinned by gangster thugs. It’s well documented. It’s the same thing that all the Trumps rallies promote. This is just the Trump supporters saying it’s a leftist democrat thing. Trump is in lock step with Putin! That’s scaring the crap out of people who used to live in the Soviet Union a hell of lot more than a socialist society that takes care of it’s hungry, poor, and sick.

It appears you aren't familiar with equal allocation accounting. No one in the gov't spent 500 for a hammer, not even during the Packard Commission source

The USSR being compared to democratic socialism is like comparing a wild wolf to a german shepherd. One will KILL you the other will SAVE you. Only an audience of scared sheep buy into this type of propaganda.

Lol, damn red states? Sup with y’all constantly losing?

Losing in civil rights, healthcare, education, the civil war.

2018’s Best & Worst States for Health Care

https://wallethub.com/edu/states-with-best-health-care/23457/

1 Vermont 66.31 3 23 1
2 Massachusetts 65.31 31 2 2
3 New Hampshire 64.03 24 4 4
4 Minnesota 63.35 11 8 8
5 Hawaii 63.08 5 35 5
6 Rhode Island 62.98 4 24 10
7 Colorado 62.69 23 15 3
8 District of Columbia 62.08 1 6 36
9 Iowa 61.94 6 19 14
10 Maryland 61.86 2 28 28
11 Connecticut 61.79 33 7 7
12 Maine 61.26 35 1 15
13 Kansas 60.20 10 9 21
14 South Dakota 59.52 34 3 16
15 Utah 59.48 25 34 6
16 Nebraska 59.35 27 14 12
17 New York 58.68 13 11 24
18 Pennsylvania 58.34 16 10 29
19 Ohio 58.18 7 18 34
20 Michigan 57.98 8 17 33
21 North Dakota 57.78 15 12 32
22 Virginia 56.93 21 29 17
23 Wisconsin 56.90 47 13 9
24 Illinois 56.79 20 16 31
25 Delaware 56.52 9 38 25
26 New Jersey 55.77 12 41 23
27 Oregon 54.47 28 40 18
28 Washington 54.29 38 42 11
29 California 54.15 17 45 19
30 New Mexico 53.52 19 27 37
31 Idaho 53.19 36 48 13
32 Montana 52.76 43 21 26
33 Wyoming 52.29 46 25 20
34 Kentucky 52.12 14 20 45
35 Indiana 52.02 18 36 40
36 Arizona 50.62 40 43 27
37 Missouri 49.92 29 22 43
38 Texas 49.00 26 51 35
39 West Virginia 48.37 45 5 47
40 Nevada 48.16 32 49 38
41 Tennessee 47.79 22 30 48
42 Florida 47.04 39 47 39
43 Georgia 46.51 30 50 42
44 South Carolina 46.14 49 32 41
45 Oklahoma 45.59 41 33 46
46 Alabama 44.03 44 44 44
47 North Carolina 43.98 50 46 30
48 Arkansas 43.22 37 31 50
49 Alaska 41.78 51 37 22
50 Mississippi 41.53 42 26 51
51 Louisiana 41.14 48 39 49

_____

Obviously DC isn’t a state.

Wow! That matches my list of States with the Highest Taxes!

I coulda told you that healthcare in GA is terrible. Nobody insures here, and the state govt doesnt give two craps about the citizens.

You already told us though. I dunno if you remember that, and I believed you.

It’s just crazy when you actually see the rankings.

like, I constantly see Louisiana and Mississippi ranked at the bottom of healthcare, education...pretty much everything except prison population.

Ok skip the hammer....but in the article it does say the over priced toilet seats,coffee pot and ash trays were the result of government specs and middlemen negotiations that the government got sold on....trick me once....shame on you...trick me twice shame on me

It's all that good ass fried southern food. Makes you happy to eat it, kills you secretly.

Yes, gov't specs on things add a lot of cost. We've done government jobs and sometimes they spec things that don't exists and have to be specially made to meet their specs.
Usually it's pretty stupid and a very comparative item is available short of some insignificant spec, but there's no one to really call and explain this too, so, you just bid it out with the custom items.