A single-payer system

[pjohns]

Why don't we simply cut to the chase?

It is my considered view that most defenders of ObamaCare really want a singer-payer system (i.e. UHC--as in Canada, and throughout just about all of Europe).

That is an intellectually reasonable position.

I disagree with it.

But it is intellectually reasonable, nonetheless.

The enthusiasm for ObamaCare, however--on the part of those who would really prefer UHC--is not really intellectually sustainable.

To use ObamaCare as merely a stalking horse for UHC simply does not work.

Do those supporters of UHC--and doubtless, there are tens of millions of these throughout the US--not see that it would be much more intellectually honest to simply argue the case for what they really desire, rather than hanging, by their fingernails, onto a failure?

So, then, please let the real debate begin...

[Chris]

It was what Obama sought. Even Trump says he supports it. To me it makes sense except eliminating competition would lead to higher health care costs.

[Peter1469]

I just saw something about healthcare. There are three goals with healthcare and you can only have two of the three. They are.

A. Universality
B. Quality
C. Affordability

The free market focuses on B and C. Look at Lasik and elective plastic surgery. They are not burdened with insurance and the red tape the government adds to typical health care. Low cost and quality for the most part.

When universality becomes a priority you lose one of the other two goals. The UK lost quality. They ration care and let people die in their beds. Other universal plans control costs, at least costs they their society is willing to bear. But they don't have gold plated service.

If the US makes A a priority it will only work if C is the second priority. B would bankrupt us.

[Chris]

I just saw something about healthcare. There are three goals with healthcare and you can only have two of the three. They are.

A. Universality
B. Quality
C. Affordability

The free market focuses on B and C. Look at Lasik and elective plastic surgery. They are not burdened with insurance and the red tape the government adds to typical health care. Low cost and quality for the most part.

When universality becomes a priority you lose one of the other two goals. The UK lost quality. They ration care and let people die in their beds. Other universal plans control costs, at least costs they their society is willing to bear. But they don't have gold plated service.

If the US makes A a priority it will only work if C is the second priority. B would bankrupt us.

True, you could sacrifice quality to affordability.

Interesting analysis.

[Dr. Who]

No worries. Technology is coming to medicine. Some of the most intricate and expensive surgeries will soon be able to be done by robotics. There are now diagnostic medical programs. Take care of Big Pharma's stranglehold on the market and the cost of prescription drugs will also come down, making UHC very affordable.

[kilgram]

It was what Obama sought. Even Trump says he supports it. To me it makes sense except eliminating competition would lead to higher health care costs.

Chris, what do you mean eliminating competition?

[kilgram]

I just saw something about healthcare. There are three goals with healthcare and you can only have two of the three. They are.

A. Universality
B. Quality
C. Affordability

The free market focuses on B and C. Look at Lasik and elective plastic surgery. They are not burdened with insurance and the red tape the government adds to typical health care. Low cost and quality for the most part.

When universality becomes a priority you lose one of the other two goals. The UK lost quality. They ration care and let people die in their beds. Other universal plans control costs, at least costs they their society is willing to bear. But they don't have gold plated service.

If the US makes A a priority it will only work if C is the second priority. B would bankrupt us.

Spanish system is:
- Universal
- Affordable
- High quality.

For example let's take the data of infant mortality.
USA: 582.1 per 100,000
Spain: 333 per 100,000
Almost the double.

Women dead in childbirth
USA: 26.4 /100,000
Spain: 5.6

About UK. In UK lost quality thank you to Thatcher and its liberalism. It was abandoned and it was applied the liberal policy to reduce quality in the healthcare service to justify privatizations. It is making cuts to make worse the system. Like, it happened with the trains where the now private train system is one of the worst of Europe, with constant delays and strikes.

[Peter1469]

No worries. Technology is coming to medicine. Some of the most intricate and expensive surgeries will soon be able to be done by robotics. There are now diagnostic medical programs. Take care of Big Pharma's stranglehold on the market and the cost of prescription drugs will also come down, making UHC very affordable.

When I had part of my intestines removed the surgery was robot assisted. I am not sure of the extent the robot worked it.

[Chris]

Chris, what do you mean eliminating competition?

Insurance companies compete as payers now. That competition would be eliminated.

[kilgram]

Insurance companies compete as payers now. That competition would be eliminated.

How would be?

Отправлено с моего Aquaris E5 через Tapatalk