Socialism

[ninjahood]

This assumes that the government product offered would compete though right? what if they product was tailored to the market of the underinsured or those without insurance? a market the insurance industry effectively isnt serving?

medicaid?

remember Bernie Sanders and his brand of socialism isn't what you are purportedly advocating for.

 

[ninjahood]

Can you post links for these statements?

Most Americans Still Rate Their Healthcare Quite Positively

Majorities of Americans rate the coverage (69%) and quality (80%) of the healthcare they personally receive as "excellent" or "good," but Americans are much less positive about healthcare in the U.S. in general.

news.gallup.com

 

[frenchbreadbuilds]

medicaid?

remember Bernie Sanders and his brand of socialism isn't what you are purportedly advocating for.

i didnt mention bernie sanders once in any of my posts. ive only spoken on the socializing of systems in relation to America.

 

[ninjahood]

frenchbreadbuilds tonelow

Why aren’t voters more willing to abandon a health system that’s failing?

Medicare-for-all needs a better answer to the public’s fears.

www.vox.com

Why aren’t voters more willing to abandon a health system that’s failing?
Medicare-for-all needs a better answer to the public’s fears.

By Ezra Klein on July 29, 2019 9:00 am


Health care reform supporters participate in a sit-in inside the lobby of a building where Aetna insurance offices are located. Mario Tama/Getty Images
What does it mean to say “if you like your health insurance, you can keep it”?

Some will remember this as a defining debate around the Affordable Care Act. One lesson Democrats took from the collapse of the Clinton administration’s 1994 reforms was that Americans hated the idea of the government canceling their insurance plans. In deference to that view, the ACA was designed to leave most existing health coverage intact, and President Obama repeatedly promised that no one would lose insurance they liked. Even so, about 3 million plans did get canceled because they were beneath the ACA’s minimum standards for health insurance, and the political backlash was fierce.



This debate has reemerged in the runup to 2020. Bernie Sanders’s Medicare-for-all plan, as currently written, would cancel every private insurance plan in the country. Polling suggests that’s lethal: When told that Medicare-for-all would abolish private insurance, respondents flip from favoring the plan by a 56 percent to 38 percent margin to opposing it by a 58 percent to 37 percent margin. These numbers, when combined with the Obamacare backlash and the Clintoncare experience, have underscored reformers’ view that a plan that takes away the private insurance people have and like is doomed.

 

[ninjahood]

ive only spoken on the socializing of systems in relation to America.

that still means expropriating entire industries.

 

[frenchbreadbuilds]

that still means expropriating entire industries.

you just circled back around.
is medicaid not a socialized system? if not, why isnt it?

edit:
additionally, why arent you making a distinction between socializing and a socialist state? clearly america as through out its history socialized things without turning into nazi germany or Venezuela

 

[ninjahood]

is medicaid not a socialized system? if not, why isnt it?

because it doesn't involve expropriating existing industries.

and its not for everyone.

see da VA.

 

[frenchbreadbuilds]

because it doesn't involve expropriating existing industries.

and its not for everyone.

see da VA.

but it’s a product provided by the government that is an alternative to the products provided by the private enterprise. The added qualifiers you add is just on the extreme end. The affordable care act was an example of socialized medicine. The public school system is socialized education. When ever the government has a product serving a market, that product is a socialized product.

 

[heelsandeers]

did you even read da wiki link?

no. I know what it did
electric grids are (were in the past) natural monopolies
a government regulated utility isn't a free market
utility prices are generally (by law) set at levels that provide a fair rate of return on invested capital, after all reasonable expenses are met
I don't think it's "socialism" to regulate the utility's prices given this state of affairs

something similar can and eventually will be done for healthcare imo, before we get to M4A
in any event, Medicare is not a government operated health care system
it is simply a single payer
just because the government pays for healthcare doesn't mean drug companies are no longer private, for-profit industries
you get that, right?

I actually agree with you: all things equal, I'd rather not turn health care over to any single provider, government or not. but not all things are equal
what useful economic function is provided by health insurers that can't be performed as well or better by Medicare?

 

[tonelow]

frenchbreadbuilds tonelow

Why aren’t voters more willing to abandon a health system that’s failing?

Medicare-for-all needs a better answer to the public’s fears.

www.vox.com

Why aren’t voters more willing to abandon a health system that’s failing?
Medicare-for-all needs a better answer to the public’s fears.

By Ezra Klein on July 29, 2019 9:00 am


Health care reform supporters participate in a sit-in inside the lobby of a building where Aetna insurance offices are located. Mario Tama/Getty Images
What does it mean to say “if you like your health insurance, you can keep it”?

Some will remember this as a defining debate around the Affordable Care Act. One lesson Democrats took from the collapse of the Clinton administration’s 1994 reforms was that Americans hated the idea of the government canceling their insurance plans. In deference to that view, the ACA was designed to leave most existing health coverage intact, and President Obama repeatedly promised that no one would lose insurance they liked. Even so, about 3 million plans did get canceled because they were beneath the ACA’s minimum standards for health insurance, and the political backlash was fierce.



This debate has reemerged in the runup to 2020. Bernie Sanders’s Medicare-for-all plan, as currently written, would cancel every private insurance plan in the country. Polling suggests that’s lethal: When told that Medicare-for-all would abolish private insurance, respondents flip from favoring the plan by a 56 percent to 38 percent margin to opposing it by a 58 percent to 37 percent margin. These numbers, when combined with the Obamacare backlash and the Clintoncare experience, have underscored reformers’ view that a plan that takes away the private insurance people have and like is doomed.

Thanks for both of those.

So basically, if you have a decent paying job you will be happy with your healthcare (duh). Meanwhile only 20% of people are satisfied with the cost of healthcare in general.

So people recognize that healthcare is a real issue. As far as m4a or any other govt program, some people are concerned about govt having too much control, but the vast majority just don't want the inconvenience of starting a new plan.

This is my issue with politics as a whole. It's just an inherently selfish system where you put your wants ahead of other people's needs. That's basically what it boils down to with most issues.

 

[johnnyredstorm]

I can't believe I oversaw this ...

Man ... tell us more.

Better yet, tell me why a white Dominican have the same racist views as a white American? Whether it be against a black Dominican or a black person in general?

If I can paraphrase Ta-Nehisi Coates, race is the child of racism, not the father.

 

[junglejim]

what useful economic function is provided by health insurers that can't be performed as well or better by Medicare?

Most insurance entities are investment vehicles so most of the profits people are looking at isn’t premiums in excess of claim payments, but investment income in reinvested premiums. The government definitely wouldn’t operate as efficiently as an insurance company, but that inefficiency would largely be offset be the ability to unilaterally set costs for services

 

[ninjahood]

The added qualifiers you add is just on the extreme end.

that's pure Socialism thou, not "an extreme" its what it is.

 

[ninjahood]

This is my issue with politics as a whole. It's just an inherently selfish system where you put your wants ahead of other people's needs.

i don't don't blame people for that, no one is obligated to put someone else before themselves or their family.

 

[ninjahood]

I don't think it's "socialism" to regulate the utility's prices given this state of affairs

healthcare isnt a utility thou... completely different animal.

 

[ninjahood]

in any event, Medicare is not a government operated health care system
it is simply a single payer
just because the government pays for healthcare doesn't mean drug companies are no longer private, for-profit industries
you get that, right?

doctors have da option to decline Medicare and Medicaid patients because usually their reimbursement rates are far lower than what insurance providers reimburse to doctors and practitioners overall. if medicare-for-all was da law of da land, doctors would essentially be employees of da state because private insurance wouldn't exist and da state would tell them what they can charge for services that they offer.

 

[gry60]

healthcare isnt a utility thou... completely different animal.

Can you define utility?

 

[keko jones]

healthcare isnt a utility thou... completely different animal.

So are you or are you not capable of differentiating what people are saying?

******* amazing!!!!!!

 

[frenchbreadbuilds]

that's pure Socialism thou, not "an extreme" its what it is.

It’s an extreme in the context of America. Still doesn’t change the fact that there are socialized elements of the government. USPS and Public schooling, both socialized systems that make the government the source of a product/service.

 

[heelsandeers]

Most insurance entities are investment vehicles so most of the profits people are looking at isn’t premiums in excess of claim payments, but investment income in reinvested premiums. The government definitely wouldn’t operate as efficiently as an insurance company, but that inefficiency would largely be offset be the ability to unilaterally set costs for services

private health care providers have massive bureaucracies because they're in the business of denying claims
medicare requires far less overhead. of course it would be much more overhead than currently exists but it's not clear to me that it would be less efficient than the current system. virtually all the studies I've read and consider reliable lead to the conclusion that the current US health care system (in varied amounts) is really cost inefficient

 

[heelsandeers]

doctors have da option to decline Medicare and Medicaid patients because usually their reimbursement rates are far lower than what insurance providers reimburse to doctors and practitioners overall. if medicare-for-all was da law of da land, doctors would essentially be employees of da state because private insurance wouldn't exist and da state would tell them what they can charge for services that they offer.

"medicare rates are too low" is a very bad argument against single payer since it is quite simple to change the payment schedules so that the reimbursement is not too low

there's a lot of gaslighting around reimbursement levels in an attempt to forestall reform. there was no shortage of media articles about how Obamacare would create a mass exodus from the medical practice

of the roughly 16 million people in the medical field 1 million are doctors. doctors pay would go down some but it's the administrative staffs that would be taking the Ls

I'm not as worried about staff reductions. if the staff performs a medical function, their jobs will be safe. if the staff doesn't perform a medical function, they will find work elsewhere

 

[ninjahood]

private health care providers have massive bureaucracies because they're in the business of denying claims
medicare requires far less overhead

private-sector blushes compared to da amount of bureaucracy and inefficiency of government run Medicare Medicaid and veterans affair.

 

[ninjahood]

there's a lot of gaslighting around reimbursement levels in an attempt to forestall reform

"gaslighting?" ask any medical provider be my guess they'll tell you government reimbursement for Medicaid and Medicare is far lower than private insurance that's a known fact.

 

[heelsandeers]

government reimbursement for Medicaid and Medicare is far lower than private insurance that's a known fact.

"medicare rates are too low" is a very bad argument against single payer since it is quite simple to change the payment schedules so that the reimbursement is not too low

 

[ninjahood]

"medicare rates are too low" is a very bad argument against single payer since it is quite simple to change the payment schedules so that the reimbursement is not too low

do you know what of payment schedules is? rationed care.

you're going to have doctors not being doctors anymore because they will not practice medicine getting paid so low. which will also cause delays.