It's time for single Payer.

B_spiker067

Experimental Member
Joined
Nov 17, 2006
Posts
2,163
Media
0
Likes
3
Points
183
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 that the government hold the accounts and pay for their administration with taxes?).

What the hell are you talking about? You'd pay directly every time you went for primary care with what would be for all intents and purposes a debit card on an HSA account?

You're just making things up at this point.
 

B_talltpaguy

Experimental Member
Joined
Nov 8, 2007
Posts
2,331
Media
0
Likes
17
Points
123
Sexuality
100% Straight, 0% Gay
Gender
Male
Ok, I can appreciate that as someone who started out in finance, I'm going to know a bit more about such things than some guy with a bad case of ideological certitude is ever going to care to learn, but play along if you can.

That debit card you're going to pay your bill with... it has to be attached to a bank account somewhere. Your HSA account deposits won't be under your mattress, they will be held by some sort of banking institution, and that entity is going to incur costs (and desire profits) from maintaining those accounts...

And so you better understand why we can't just 'lock' money away, and why it would basically have to be in some sort of bank account... we can't require Americans to take money from their regular bank accounts, and deposit those funds into these accounts which are locked away from the banking system. That's a surefire way to cripple the capital markets, because every dollar in liquidity you remove, amounts to at least 3 dollars that can't be loaned out to businesses and circulated through the economy.
 
Last edited:

B_talltpaguy

Experimental Member
Joined
Nov 8, 2007
Posts
2,331
Media
0
Likes
17
Points
123
Sexuality
100% Straight, 0% Gay
Gender
Male
^Is this your new suggestion for people who don't have access to affordable healthcare?

"Just laugh when you're sick, because laughter is the best medicine!"
 

Pitbull

Sexy Member
Joined
Oct 25, 2006
Posts
3,659
Media
0
Likes
51
Points
268
Sexuality
100% Straight, 0% Gay
Gender
Male
-to stop treating the "health and well being" of the citizens of the United States as a commodity on which to make a PROFIT
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/03/05/insurers-set-to-raise-pri_n_487684.html

It seems like PROFIT is a dirty word.

Have you given any thought to how the Health Care System of the United States would function if you took the profit motive out of something that is responsible for around 20% of GDP?
(Hint you are taking away incentive from a lot of people)

Care to tell us how you are living a non profit life?
Do you put money in a bank and tell them:
"Don't give me any interest. It is wrong to make a profit!"?
 

B_spiker067

Experimental Member
Joined
Nov 17, 2006
Posts
2,163
Media
0
Likes
3
Points
183
^Is this your new suggestion for people who don't have access to affordable healthcare?

"Just laugh when you're sick, because laughter is the best medicine!"

The solution is HSA's for primary care and most chronic care with catastrophic insurance to cover really big things. Realize that if your company was paying $1500 a month for insurance they'd probably be just as happy to direct deposit it into an HSA.

The HSA would be completely tax free and could only be used to pay for health care and possibly tuition.

You'd be able to transfer funds freely from HSA to HSA account from parent to child or from person to charity case.

The poor would get stipends put into their HSA.

Medicare-medicaid-VA would still be viably supported programs.

Insurance companies would be mandated to take a certain number of pre-existing cases say 70%. They'd shop for the best cases and offer them lower rates to get them. The balance would go on medicaid and taxes on profits from health care would go to pay for these cases.

HSA's would be the ultimate in portability.

And that is just a broad brush sketch. I'm sure an American born finance guy could hash out the rest from his imagination even if he didn't agree with it.

[edit People who don't put in an HSA would have to pay out of pocket like the rest and if they did buy insurance coverage would kick in gradually (say 20% the first year, 40% the second, or whatever worked to get the most to buy insurance early on while not having to MANDATE IT).]
 
Last edited:

B_spiker067

Experimental Member
Joined
Nov 17, 2006
Posts
2,163
Media
0
Likes
3
Points
183

SilverTrain

Legendary Member
Joined
Aug 25, 2008
Posts
4,623
Media
82
Likes
1,328
Points
333
Location
USA
Sexuality
No Response
Gender
Male
It seems like PROFIT is a dirty word.

Have you given any thought to how the Health Care System of the United States would function if you took the profit motive out of something that is responsible for around 20% of GDP?
(Hint you are taking away incentive from a lot of people)

Care to tell us how you are living a non profit life?
Do you put money in a bank and tell them:
"Don't give me any interest. It is wrong to make a profit!"?

Hey!

Strawman plus changing the subject!

Now with extra vitamins and minerals.
 

SilverTrain

Legendary Member
Joined
Aug 25, 2008
Posts
4,623
Media
82
Likes
1,328
Points
333
Location
USA
Sexuality
No Response
Gender
Male
The solution is HSA's for primary care and most chronic care with catastrophic insurance to cover really big things. Realize that if your company was paying $1500 a month for insurance they'd probably be just as happy to direct deposit it into an HSA.

The HSA would be completely tax free and could only be used to pay for health care and possibly tuition.

You'd be able to transfer funds freely from HSA to HSA account from parent to child or from person to charity case.

The poor would get stipends put into their HSA.

Medicare-medicaid-VA would still be viably supported programs.

Insurance companies would be mandated to take a certain number of pre-existing cases say 70%. They'd shop for the best cases and offer them lower rates to get them. The balance would go on medicaid and taxes on profits from health care would go to pay for these cases.

HSA's would be the ultimate in portability.

And that is just a broad brush sketch. I'm sure an American born finance guy could hash out the rest from his imagination even if he didn't agree with it.

[edit People who don't put in an HSA would have to pay out of pocket like the rest and if they did buy insurance coverage would kick in gradually (say 20% the first year, 40% the second, or whatever worked to get the most to buy insurance early on while not having to MANDATE IT).]


And you honestly want to put this forth as a superior alternative to single payer?

Your proposal loses on all counts. Go ahead and tell that to the professor/pundit who you heard it from.
 

B_spiker067

Experimental Member
Joined
Nov 17, 2006
Posts
2,163
Media
0
Likes
3
Points
183
And you honestly want to put this forth as a superior alternative to single payer?

Your proposal loses on all counts. Go ahead and tell that to the professor/pundit who you heard it from.

Oh, please go add a wank picture to your gallery. You'd waste your time instead of mine.

^Please handle it like the joke it is and not get all weenie about it.
 

SilverTrain

Legendary Member
Joined
Aug 25, 2008
Posts
4,623
Media
82
Likes
1,328
Points
333
Location
USA
Sexuality
No Response
Gender
Male
Oh, please go add a wank picture to your gallery. You'd waste your time instead of mine.

^Please handle it like the joke it is and not get all weenie about it.

I couldn't care less about jokes pertaining to me wanking. I like to wank. No apologies there. Don't look if you don't want to.

But your rigid adherence to some ideological tether-ball pole is indeed disturbing. You seem to have a command of the language and an ability to communicate in writing. But clinging to the notion that any sort of privatized health care system is more efficient, because it is profit-based, is ludicrous.

Hint: history is instructive. Private health insurance companies don't care about your health. They only care about making money. An HSA won't change that. It will only possibly offer the big rich guys yet one more way to make money off the little guy. And they'll continue to deny coverage, charge a shitload, etc.......

Let the logic wash over you.....
 

B_spiker067

Experimental Member
Joined
Nov 17, 2006
Posts
2,163
Media
0
Likes
3
Points
183
I couldn't care less about jokes pertaining to me wanking. I like to wank. No apologies there. Don't look if you don't want to.

But your rigid adherence to some ideological tether-ball pole is indeed disturbing. You seem to have a command of the language and an ability to communicate in writing. But clinging to the notion that any sort of privatized health care system is more efficient, because it is profit-based, is ludicrous.

Hint: history is instructive. Private health insurance companies don't care about your health. They only care about making money. An HSA won't change that. It will only possibly offer the big rich guys yet one more way to make money off the little guy. And they'll continue to deny coverage, charge a shitload, etc.......

Let the logic wash over you.....

Another one who can't hear but for hearing himself.
 

B_spiker067

Experimental Member
Joined
Nov 17, 2006
Posts
2,163
Media
0
Likes
3
Points
183
And you honestly want to put this forth as a superior alternative to single payer?

Your proposal loses on all counts. Go ahead and tell that to the professor/pundit who you heard it from.

Name one single-payer system that doesn't run in the red or that creates cutting edge medicine to the same degree that the U.S. does.
 

SilverTrain

Legendary Member
Joined
Aug 25, 2008
Posts
4,623
Media
82
Likes
1,328
Points
333
Location
USA
Sexuality
No Response
Gender
Male
Name one single-payer system that doesn't run in the red or that creates cutting edge medicine to the same degree that the U.S. does.

I don't know or care what the red level is on other health care systems. Ours is broken. It needs to be fixed. Throwing up the straw man of profitability is a weak dodge that I keep calling you on. Emergencies call for action. We will make it work. Will the system be "profitable" in it's initial stages? Almost certainly not. Is the system "profitable" now for anyone other than an outrageously minute percentage of society (e.g., Big Health executives and majority stockholders)? Of course not. And more importantly, scads of our citizenry are sick and dying because they have no access to healthcare. I am a "white collar professional" and when something "odd" happens with me and my doctor sends me to get pics taken, tests run, etc, it costs a shitload. My "employer health insurance" covers a shockingly low percentage, AFTER THE SHOCKINGLY HIGH DEDUCTIBLE. I can be practically bankrupted by a false alarm. This is not a rarely occurring scenario. In fact, it is all too "every fucking day".

This would change, HOW, under your HSA shroom dream? Oh, that extra 30 grand I have in my coffee can would go into the HSA, right? And my neighbor who works at Target, she could just turn about 100 tricks every few months to fund her HSA.

Christ.

And the stuff about the US doing all the "cutting edge" work to save the world? It's ridiculous, not true, and it's the sort of ignorant statement that gets the rest of the world pissed off at us. So give that a rest for heaven's sake. Again, take a look at the history of medicine (and not the RNC Playbook version).
 

B_talltpaguy

Experimental Member
Joined
Nov 8, 2007
Posts
2,331
Media
0
Likes
17
Points
123
Sexuality
100% Straight, 0% Gay
Gender
Male
Name one single-payer system that doesn't run in the red or that creates cutting edge medicine to the same degree that the U.S. does.
What the heck are you talking about? No single payer system runs in the red. It's fundamentally impossible for them to, because billing is backed by the government. All bills incurred by patients receiving care are paid, period. There are no losses for doctors and hospitals from a lack of payment, which is a serious impediment to cost predictability and control in the US system.


I have a better question for discussion...

Name one single-payer system that costs more money per capita than our system does.

Good luck!


oh and ps... If the US medical system is so 'cutting edge', then why have pharmaceutical companies been migrating their research to Europe for years, and why have biotechs been stagnating US operations, while expanding aggressively in SE Asia?... You conservatives are all the same. All you have is ideological certitude, but you don't know the facts. But the thing is, you have to know the facts AND know how to apply them to solve a problem for people to respect you... You can't wing it and propose a solution that suits your personal agenda and then invent 'facts' that suit the agenda. This is the internet age, and scientists love to tell everyone what they're up to...
http://content.healthaffairs.org/cgi/content/abstract/hlthaff.28.5.w969
http://scienceblogs.com/biotech/2008/11/stem_cell_research_lets_go_to.php
 
Last edited:

B_spiker067

Experimental Member
Joined
Nov 17, 2006
Posts
2,163
Media
0
Likes
3
Points
183
What the heck are you talking about? No single payer system runs in the red. It's fundamentally impossible for them to, because billing is backed by the government. All bills incurred by patients receiving care are paid, period. There are no losses for doctors and hospitals from a lack of payment, which is a serious impediment to cost predictability and control in the US system.


I have a better question for discussion...

Name one single-payer system that costs more money per capita than our system does.

Good luck!


oh and ps... If the US medical system is so 'cutting edge', then why have pharmaceutical companies been migrating their research to Europe for years, and why have biotechs and medical device/equipment manufacturers been stagnating US operations, while expanding aggressively in SE Asia?... You conservatives are always so behind the times. You gotta actually know the facts before you try and tell people about them.
Global Drug Discovery: Europe Is Ahead -- Light 28 (5): w969 -- Health Affairs
Stem Cell Research: Let's Go To Asia! : What's New in Life Science Research

WTF, you quote blogs???

How about the fact that health care in Canada and Europe are subsidized by Americans. You do realize that Swiss drug makers have their prices fixed at home and have to make their profits selling to America?

You do understand that running in the red means govt. pay more for medicine than they alloted for in the budget so that it goes into deficit spending?

You do realize that most of the work done on making adult stem cell pluripotent is American? That that kind of research is more likely to help you specifically?

You do realize I don't like the current system so asking me to defend it is bizarre request whereas you like socialized systems in which govt. pays means you have to defend those results?