Jump to content


Photo
- - - - -

Thanks Obama


  • Please log in to reply
43 replies to this topic

#16 PhillyB

PhillyB

    hari kari for amari

  • ALL-PRO
  • 21,694 posts
  • Locationthird spur east of the sun

Posted 08 January 2014 - 01:01 AM

Do nothing and less than half of all Americans would have been able to afford healthcare insurance by the end of the decade.

 

The ACA is a bastardized program passed by a political party vested in keeping millions of disenfranchised people in this country from being denied basic health care.

 

The other party has repeatedly demonstrated they don't give a damn about anyone incapable of paying for private health insurance and would rather those people die and reduce the surplus population.

 

Hopefully one day, the majority of Americans wake up and realize they can pay less money and get better healthcare outcomes by simply adopting the system successfully used by the rest of the civilized world.

 

Sadly, until that day, the ACA is as good as it gets in the USA when it comes to healthcare.

 

for the sake of argument, how would adopting a single-payer system reduce healthcare costs? expound at length if you will



#17 boostownsme

boostownsme

    Junior Member

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 190 posts

Posted 08 January 2014 - 02:10 AM

for the sake of argument, how would adopting a single-payer system reduce healthcare costs? expound at length if you will

 

I'd like to hear that as well. Considering government's been breaking up monopolies for decades because they are " bad for the consumer and competition", I'd like to see how they would pass a single payer system . I've yet to hear a valid argument.



#18 PhillyB

PhillyB

    hari kari for amari

  • ALL-PRO
  • 21,694 posts
  • Locationthird spur east of the sun

Posted 08 January 2014 - 02:34 AM

I'd like to hear that as well. Considering government's been breaking up monopolies for decades because they are " bad for the consumer and competition", I'd like to see how they would pass a single payer system . I've yet to hear a valid argument.

 

i have no problem with the notion of a single-payer system, since we've seen it effectively implemented in other western nations, but i am curious as to how that would presumably fix the astronomically high cost of healthcare we have here. i don't doubt there's a cogent argument out there, i've just not sought it out and heard it before.



#19 NanuqoftheNorth

NanuqoftheNorth

    Frosty Alaskan Amber

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,935 posts
  • LocationAlaska

Posted 08 January 2014 - 03:32 AM

for the sake of argument, how would adopting a single-payer system reduce healthcare costs? expound at length if you will

 
You are quite the instigator aren't you? :P
 
I am pretty sure if someone took the time to go back a year or two I've already posted all that information.  I may do it yet again, but not tonight.
 
There are at least 35 nations in the world that spend less per capita than the USA and still get better health outcomes than we do.
 
The most obvious flaw in our current system is the "for-profit/free market" approach. 
 
The "free market" works reasonably well when we are buying a loaf of bread, a cell phone or a car, at least when we have the time and motivation to cross shop the competition. 
 
Cross shopping rarely happens when life and death healthcare issues arise.  Who's going to be bold enough to suggest Mom or Dad be moved to a healthcare facility on the other side of town where they are having a limited time, two-for-one offer on bypass surgery? 
 
Nobody, that is why healthcare costs in this nation have been largely unfettered by traditional market forces. It has led to greater rates of inflation for healthcare than for other sectors of our economy. 

Government control of medical costs would provide all Americans with an advocate in their corner when they need one most, when they are seeking medical attention.  Good ole Uncle Sam!  Other countries' national healthcare programs strongly suggest Americans would finally receive a "fair and balanced" approach to healthcare.  A "fair and balanced" approach that 35 other governments have been providing to their citizens for generations now.
 
Another area of savings would be the elimination of private healthcare insurance.  

The private insurance industry spends about 20 percent of its revenue on administration, marketing, and profits. Further, this industry imposes on physicians and hospitals an administrative burden in billing and insurance-related functions that consumes another 12 percent of insurance premiums. Thus, about one-third of private insurance premiums are absorbed in administrative services that could be drastically reduced if we were to finance health care through a single non-profit or public fund. Indeed, studies have shown that replacing the multiplicity of public and private payers with a single national health insurance program would eliminate $350 billion in wasteful expenditures, enough to pay for the care that the uninsured and the underinsured are not currently receiving.  
http://www.pnhp.org/...nsurance_fo.php
 
The above article breaks down the opportunities for cost savings in greater detail.  Feel free to peruse it for yourselves.
 
Once again, this is not theory, this approach is already being employed by the rest of the modern world where governments ensure their citizens receive healthcare better than our own, for less money.

#20 TANTRIC-NINJA

TANTRIC-NINJA

    The holy ghost of Mr. Miyagi

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,374 posts
  • LocationColumbia, South Kacky

Posted 08 January 2014 - 03:58 AM

Not to mention all extra "red tape" private insurance companies implement like excessive authorizations on simple procedures. This causes small practice doctors to tie up their staff on the phone with a customer service rep answering questions about the patient so the Doctor can be paid for his services.

It also gives Private insurance a reason to deny payment to the doctor and now have his staff consumed with collecting bills from the patient.. Or reobtaining an authorization to correct the payments. My wife gets great insurance from the hospital she works at but we have to get authorizations on everything!

The ACA was republican supported when insurance companies were allowed to come in and pen the freaking bill.... Of course it will not cut costs down. Obama just wanted it passed bc something had to be done with healthcare costs going out of control.

The ACA is not the single payer health system we should have fought to get... But like with a lot of things.. The Bama and his admin have a horrible time explaining to the public what is going on and how we would benefit from option a,b,c.....as long as it passed the Prez is happy. It is a significant bulletpoint to his admin.

The ACA is written for insurance companies by insurance companies it is MEGACaptialism, perverted for your pleasure with GOV support... The campaign support dollars will continue to flow.

#21 MadHatter

MadHatter

    The Only Voice of Reason

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 19,465 posts
  • LocationDark Side of the Moon

Posted 08 January 2014 - 08:32 AM

i think what a lot of people fail to realize about the aca is that it is unlikely to lower the cost of healthcare. it was designed to lower the rate of increase... which it appears to be doing


So you assertion is that the ACA is controlling costs from 2010-2013....even though it was not implemented during that period.

Laughable

#22 mav1234

mav1234

    Senior Member

  • ALL-PRO
  • 16,760 posts

Posted 08 January 2014 - 10:35 AM

So you assertion is that the ACA is controlling costs from 2010-2013....even though it was not implemented during that period.

Laughable

 

Many provisions of the ACA were implemented when the legislation was signed or in the years immediately afterwards.



#23 cookinwithgas

cookinwithgas

    Grey Poupon Elitest Trash

  • ALL-PRO
  • 23,773 posts

Posted 08 January 2014 - 11:11 AM

Um the exact things I mentioned were implemented

#24 g5jamz

g5jamz

    Is back

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 18,768 posts

Posted 08 January 2014 - 11:30 AM

Thanks Obama

 

http://www.washingto...doesnt-match-h/

 

As for healthcare, it's been Obama's plan all along to have a single payer system and this Obamacare crapstorm was just a vehicle to get everyone so pissed off they'd welcome single payer. 



#25 Delhommey

Delhommey

    Moderator

  • Moderators
  • 12,585 posts

Posted 08 January 2014 - 11:37 AM

Thanks Obama

 

http://www.washingto...doesnt-match-h/

 

As for healthcare, it's been Obama's plan all along to have a single payer system and this Obamacare crapstorm was just a vehicle to get everyone so pissed off they'd welcome single payer. 

 

The Washington Times? Seriously?

 

Might as well link to the National Enquirer. 



#26 g5jamz

g5jamz

    Is back

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 18,768 posts

Posted 08 January 2014 - 11:48 AM

You're right...the poverty level isn't the highest in 50 years...



#27 cookinwithgas

cookinwithgas

    Grey Poupon Elitest Trash

  • ALL-PRO
  • 23,773 posts

Posted 08 January 2014 - 12:31 PM

Again Obama is an incompetent unqualified fool who is also implementing a complex hoax on all the people of the nation

#28 g5jamz

g5jamz

    Is back

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 18,768 posts

Posted 08 January 2014 - 12:40 PM

Got to tear it down to make yourself look like a savior.  Rather Palpatine-ish. 



#29 thatlookseasy

thatlookseasy

    Death to pennies

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,950 posts

Posted 08 January 2014 - 01:09 PM

for the sake of argument, how would adopting a single-payer system reduce healthcare costs? expound at length if you will

 

I think the biggest cost saving you see with single payer is a significant drop in ER visits.  When people dont have insurance, they dont go to the doctor with minor issues.  Some of those minor issues go away, some get worse.  Those that get worse eventually go to the emergency room for treatment once the problem because serious, and treating serious medical issues is significantly more expensive than preventing them.



#30 thefuzz

thefuzz

    coppin a feel

  • ALL-PRO
  • 8,700 posts

Posted 08 January 2014 - 01:15 PM

Do nothing and less than half of all Americans would have been able to afford healthcare insurance by the end of the decade.

 

The ACA is a bastardized program passed by a political party vested in keeping millions of disenfranchised people in this country from being denied basic health care.

 

The other party has repeatedly demonstrated they don't give a damn about anyone incapable of paying for private health insurance and would rather those people die and reduce the surplus population.

 

Hopefully one day, the majority of Americans wake up and realize they can pay less money and get better healthcare outcomes by simply adopting the system successfully used by the rest of the civilized world.

 

Sadly, until that day, the ACA is as good as it gets in the USA when it comes to healthcare.

 

 

How about young, middle to high income earners, whom rarely if ever need any type of care?

 

What about middle aged, middle to high income earners whom are the larges voting body in the US?

 

I have a major issue with the federal government taking on more responsibility, when they can't even handle the ones that they have.

 

Defense, education, infrastructure....let's try to fix what we are already over our heads on before adding more responsibilities to the village idiot.




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users

Shop at Amazon Contact Us: info@carolinahuddle.com