It's time for single Payer.

Discussion in 'Politics' started by Industrialsize, Mar 5, 2010.

  1. Industrialsize

    Staff Member Moderator Gold Member

    Joined:
    Dec 23, 2006
    Messages:
    24,341
    Albums:
    2
    Likes Received:
    2,199
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    United States
    I think it's time for 2 things:
    - to stop perpetuating the myth that the FREE MARKET will ever do anything but continue to raise Health Insurance rates and price citizens and employers out of the market
    -to stop treating the "health and well being" of the citizens of the United States as a commodity on which to make a PROFIT
    Insurers Set To Raise Prices, Walk Away From Consumers: Goldman Report


    The market concentration for health insurance is so monopolized in some areas that insurance companies are willing to raise prices and lose customers in an effort to improve their bottom line, a leading insurance broker told Wall Street analysts on Wednesday.
    In a conference call organized by Goldman Sachs Global Investment Research, Steve Lewis, a highly regarded broker at the world's third largest insurance broker, Willis, painted a picture of the health insurance market in which employers seem likely to be priced out of coverage.
    Noting that "price competition" between insurers was "down from a year ago," Lewis relayed that "incumbent carriers seem more willing than ever to walk away from existing business."



    Insurers Set To Raise Prices, Walk Away From Consumers: Goldman Report






     
  2. finsuptx

    finsuptx New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 18, 2006
    Messages:
    405
    Likes Received:
    5
    Gender:
    Male
    What's wrong with Universal Healthcare? Congress gets their choices of HMO's, Point-of-Service, and fee-for-service options and 75% is paid by taxpayers. The United States is the only industrialized nation in the world that does not guarrantee healthcare to all of its citizens. Congress has no incentive to "fix" healthcare because they're simply not worried about it.

    I don't get a bill from the Fire Department or Police Department when they make a trip to my house, and God knows I pay plenty in school taxes (while as a gay man, I'm barred by law from adopting). So the question remains, we ALL are already paying for everyone's health insurance in some shady fashion or other. Why not level the playing field, spread the costs AND benefits to the entire population?

    Fearmongering over "socialized medicine" is an absolutely rediculous argument. Universal Healthcare would normalize and equalize healthcare costs and standards across the board, and I would have to guess it would also lower costs as well. A name hospital buys and uses the same sterilized equipment the county hospital does, but their bill will charge you three times as much (then they'll both leave it in your body to develop sepsis).

    Universal Healthcare would also cut down on medical malpractice suits and judgements, catastrophic illnesses - because given the choice, people would rather go in soon-than-later for preventive care than wait for that nasty bout of cancer to spread.

    I'm just not sure why people wouldn't want to cover EVERYONE in the country AND reduce our individual and overall costs of healthcare altogether.
     
  3. midlifebear

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    Dec 21, 2007
    Messages:
    5,908
    Likes Received:
    11
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Nevada, Buenos Aires, and Barçelona
    Well, for one thing where would be the profit in doing that? :biggrin1:
     
  4. houtx48

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2006
    Messages:
    7,095
    Likes Received:
    35
    Gender:
    Male
    do I have to run for congress to get their health care plan or is this a case I got mine and fuck the rest of you.
     
  5. finsuptx

    finsuptx New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 18, 2006
    Messages:
    405
    Likes Received:
    5
    Gender:
    Male
    If you run for congress, just make sure to find a mute page to harrass ;-)
     
  6. SilverTrain

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    Aug 25, 2008
    Messages:
    4,582
    Albums:
    8
    Likes Received:
    404
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    USA

    I couldn't agree more, despite having long been convinced that there is just too much money backing the campaign of misinformation, disinformation and libel/slander of anyone proposing to implement such a human plan. That both Clinton and Obama were charging into the fray and willing to take on this most sacred of profit cows was truly inspiring in the '08 Presidential campaign. And the fact that Obama is not giving up despite the massive tide of corporate greed running against him, continues to give me hope.

    I do wish Obama would get behind single payer and just keep pushing. If he did, it might just win the day.

    Despite all the Republican mockery, "hope" and "change" remain in play.
     
  7. B_talltpaguy

    B_talltpaguy New Member

    Joined:
    Nov 8, 2007
    Messages:
    2,394
    Likes Received:
    0
    Gender:
    Male
    Because too many bigots in this country are still too prejudiced and/or racist to ever tolerate the idea that some of their earnings might somehow go to keeping someone they don't personally approve of for one reason or another, alive.
     
  8. B_spiker067

    B_spiker067 New Member

    Joined:
    Nov 17, 2006
    Messages:
    2,189
    Likes Received:
    0
    I totally agree - single payer - YOU with your own HSA account.

    BTW, they are raising the prices now so that they will lower them later after the bill (if it) is passed. It is what they do time and again. Kinda stupid but it will work. The politicians will get them to lower prices and take credit for lowering the prices back down to where they were. Consumers buy it all the time.
     
  9. B_talltpaguy

    B_talltpaguy New Member

    Joined:
    Nov 8, 2007
    Messages:
    2,394
    Likes Received:
    0
    Gender:
    Male
    ^The problem is, it's going to trigger the opposite reaction with the public this time. Last time, we didn't have the internet, where lots of people can now go find the truth by talking to people all over the world. This time, we do.



    No. In that scenario, we're still paying corporate middlemen a profit margin to do something we have no need for them to do... That's the solution the insurance companies favor, because worst case, they can turn into 'HSA management' firms instead of being driven into other sectors of the insurance market, or out of business all together.
     
    #9 B_talltpaguy, Mar 5, 2010
    Last edited: Mar 5, 2010
  10. SilverTrain

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    Aug 25, 2008
    Messages:
    4,582
    Albums:
    8
    Likes Received:
    404
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    USA
    Gee, people with the benefit of medicaid or medicaire don't worry so much about that. Do they?

    I realize you took some class somewhere, or read some propaganda somewhere, and you really don't want to let it go.

    But you need to.
     
  11. ericbythebay

    Verified Gold Member

    Joined:
    Oct 16, 2006
    Messages:
    304
    Albums:
    2
    Likes Received:
    8
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    San Francisco
    Verified:
    Photo
    When the government can correctly deliver my mail for a year, then I'd be willing to let them take over my health care.

    Are insurance companies the answer, no. Heath care is not a free market, it has never been and it most likely won't be.

    The only way single payer works is with rationing. Everyone can't go to the doctor for anything or the model falls apart. So where does one start drawing the line with a single payer system? Can that single payer in the interest of keep costs low, dictate what you eat or how you exercise?
     
  12. B_talltpaguy

    B_talltpaguy New Member

    Joined:
    Nov 8, 2007
    Messages:
    2,394
    Likes Received:
    0
    Gender:
    Male
    Why is it some of you people just fundamentally can't understand such simple concepts?

    Unless a country is infinity wealthy, with infinite medical resources, then ALL HEALTHCARE SYSTEMS MUST RATION CARE ONE WAY OR ANOTHER.

    Why? Because all human beings are born with the instinct to be alive and healthy. Healthcare is NOT a consumer product, and there is no 'supply and demand' for life itself. All human beings have an equally infinite 'demand' to live.

    The choice we are faced with isn't between care or no care... The choice is how we want to utilize the resources we have... Do we reform and change to the same kind of system the rest of the industrialized world is using and administer care based on a citizen's medical need? Or do we leave our current system alone, and continue to ration care based on how much profit treating that patient will make for the corporations performing the work, and continue to cast aside humans whose bodies can't be farmed for sufficient profit to please corporate investors?
     
    #12 B_talltpaguy, Mar 5, 2010
    Last edited: Mar 5, 2010
  13. midlifebear

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    Dec 21, 2007
    Messages:
    5,908
    Likes Received:
    11
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Nevada, Buenos Aires, and Barçelona
    Hmmm. . . and I suppose the US mail must have "death squads" deciding which pieces of junk mail have the right to be delivered? What a world, what a world. :smile:
     
  14. DaveUSADAV

    DaveUSADAV Member

    Joined:
    Nov 9, 2007
    Messages:
    89
    Albums:
    1
    Likes Received:
    3
    Gender:
    Male
    Totally agree with Industrialsize- the logic is simple, with everyone insured, the pool is divided into smaller and smaller segments, all paying the same and the premiums and the expenses go down. That is why all these insurance companies want more and more insured- the risk is spread more and more among the insured.
     
  15. B_talltpaguy

    B_talltpaguy New Member

    Joined:
    Nov 8, 2007
    Messages:
    2,394
    Likes Received:
    0
    Gender:
    Male
    ^The problem is, that goes 100% against the "me, me, me" mentality of the political right in this country.

    And convincing a lot of them that we're collectively better off this way doesn't mean a damn thing. They understand that collectively we're better off. They simply don't give a shit about that, they only care about their own personal perception of their bottom line. If a law isn't literally bribing them in some direct way, then they aren't going to support it, period.

    These are people who think we can only solve 'their' problems (not 'our' problems) by doing things like eliminating all 'entitlement' programs (such as social security, medicare, etc), getting rid of public education, the post office and public transit, as well as dismantling of 2/3rds of the departments in the Cabinet... What these people are really saying is that they want to enjoy the stability, comfort and opportunities inherent with living in an advanced society like the United States, they just don't want to have to pay their fair share after benefiting from it.
     
    #15 B_talltpaguy, Mar 5, 2010
    Last edited: Mar 5, 2010
  16. B_spiker067

    B_spiker067 New Member

    Joined:
    Nov 17, 2006
    Messages:
    2,189
    Likes Received:
    0
    Why should I quit with my opinion I have to hear your ridiculous ideas. The kind of ideas that would drag us to the socialist hell that is Greece and Portugal today. And if it wasn't for opposition the shit covered socialist state of Venezuela is what Obama would have us live under.

    Yeah, you reign in capitalism run amuck but you don't do it by turning into a social liberal.
     
  17. B_spiker067

    B_spiker067 New Member

    Joined:
    Nov 17, 2006
    Messages:
    2,189
    Likes Received:
    0

    1)They raise the price so that in the eventuality that legislation passes requiring them to lower their prices they are simply lowering their prices to today's level. It is a strategy often employed by industries.

    2) When you put money into a savings account there generally are no corporate middle men ripping you off.

    3) The Insurance companies will be around for catastrophic insurance coverage.
     
  18. B_talltpaguy

    B_talltpaguy New Member

    Joined:
    Nov 8, 2007
    Messages:
    2,394
    Likes Received:
    0
    Gender:
    Male
    Riiight... because in the future, people will deftly handle their own medical billing and payment processing? lolol... Don't be a tool. HSA accounts are a cash grab by business interests, the same as it was when they proposed the same BS for social security. Those funds will be deposited somewhere, and someone will most certainly be doing a shit-ton of 'investing' and profiting from someone else's money. And when they 'whoops' lose it all, legal or not, it'll be the taxpayers bailing them out yet again

    It's absolutely stunning to see someone suggest with a straight face that we trust the same business interests with our money that just crashed our economy and put millions of people out of work chasing that extra point for their share price. Sorry, but suggesting we put our money in the banks, and then they'll pay our medical bills for us as they come in (they promise, really!) is just absolutely comical.

    I mean Jesus Christ dude, you gotta at least wait until the cops leave before you try to rob the bank again, ya know?
     
    #18 B_talltpaguy, Mar 6, 2010
    Last edited: Mar 6, 2010
  19. B_spiker067

    B_spiker067 New Member

    Joined:
    Nov 17, 2006
    Messages:
    2,189
    Likes Received:
    0
    Not even close. Social Security is an investment retirement tool. It could have been subject to theft being privatized. But alternately the Social Security plan is a federal ponzi scheme. All the money ever collected for Social Security was put year in and year out into the budget. Literally an IOU was put into the Social Security lock box.

    On the other hand even after the last market crash I'd still have 2/3 of my SS money if I held it and invested it in a Dow Index fund.

    It would be harder to defraud a system in which I'm paying directly for primary care and I could hire a Healthcare adivisor like I might hire an accountant.
     
  20. B_talltpaguy

    B_talltpaguy New Member

    Joined:
    Nov 8, 2007
    Messages:
    2,394
    Likes Received:
    0
    Gender:
    Male
    Harder to defraud for who? You wouldn't be paying directly. Your money would be locked in an account that you can't touch unless the shit hits the fan. In the meantime (might be a year, might be 30), your money is most certainly going to be securitized by whichever corporate entity is holding it, which is going to invest that money to pay for the cost of providing those accounts. (unless you're paradoxically suggesting we have HSA accounts where the government manages the accounts and pays for their administration with taxes?).
     
Draft saved Draft deleted