View Poll Results: Choose which option fits your view the best:

Voters
49. You may not vote on this poll
  • I live in a country with UHC and I would never want privatized-only medicine

    12 24.49%
  • I live in a country with UHC and I do want privatized-only medicine

    2 4.08%
  • I live in a country with privatized-only medicine and I want UHC

    24 48.98%
  • I live in a country with privatized-only medicine and I would never want UHC

    8 16.33%
  • I live in a country with privatized-only medicine and I want a public option only

    3 6.12%
Page 9 of 11 FirstFirst ... 7891011 LastLast
Results 81 to 90 of 107

Thread: UHC vs Privatized Care

  1. #81
    Sage
    Harry Guerrilla's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Not affiliated with other libertarians.
    Last Seen
    09-01-17 @ 02:38 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    28,955

    Re: UHC vs Privatized Care

    Quote Originally Posted by Kandahar View Post
    It's actually a combination of lack of government regulation, and the lack of competition from a universal health care plan of some sort. Those are the two major differences between the US and most other countries. If not these differences, to what do you attribute our grotesquely inefficient health care market?
    No we have a patch work of government regulation, which eliminates choice in many areas.
    In some cases there is less regulation, in others a lot.
    The policy price differences in each state are evident of this.

    The main difference between the U.S. medical market and other countries with less costly systems, is that the countries with less costly systems tend to ration care by restricting supply.
    Not enough to hurt a lot of people, but enough to restrict the availability of some care.

    That presents another cost problem not factored in to the equation, the time lost waiting for some services.
    It's an unmeasured opportunity cost.
    Getting that knee surgery in 2 weeks vs. waiting a month or 2.
    How much does it cost the economy to have that person being unproductive, then multiply it by the number of people who have to wait for these not serious but necessary services.


    Quote Originally Posted by Kandahar View Post
    That is not universal access. Most services are not provided in an emergency room, and waiting until a health problem becomes severe enough to be an emergency means it will cost many times more to treat.
    Even then, most people can visit the doctor, get treated and opt to be billed.


    Quote Originally Posted by Kandahar View Post
    Getting treated when you get hit by a bus does not qualify as universal health care. We do not have general purpose universal health care in this country.
    Fortunately it's not limited to just emergencies.

    Quote Originally Posted by Kandahar View Post
    If you are suggesting that we should stop intentionally making Medicare more expensive than it needs to be as a favor to the health care industry, then I agree. But what do you think is so unique to the American political system that makes this task insurmountable, whereas far more dysfunctional polities like Italy and Greece are able to do so?
    The politicians respond to the voters better here, at least when it comes to medical benefits.
    Democracy has it's downside and that's when the voters wants, conflict with the state's finances.
    I was discovering that life just simply isn't fair and bask in the unsung glory of knowing that each obstacle overcome along the way only adds to the satisfaction in the end. Nothing great, after all, was ever accomplished by anyone sulking in his or her misery.
    —Adam Shepard

  2. #82
    Gradualist

    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Last Seen
    09-25-17 @ 12:48 PM
    Lean
    Socialist
    Posts
    34,949
    Blog Entries
    6

    Re: UHC vs Privatized Care

    My Step Grandfather lived in Whales till he was 17 and his family still lives in Whales and London and he says that he only remembers positive things about the health care system over there and his family that still lives in London and Whales does not complain and only speaks of positives about their health system.


  3. #83
    Sage
    whysoserious's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Charlotte, NC
    Last Seen
    12-29-16 @ 03:02 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    8,170

    Re: UHC vs Privatized Care

    Quote Originally Posted by Harry Guerrilla View Post
    Erm no.
    See right now, in order for those risk groups to get covered, they generally have to draw a check, which also means they're restricted from working.
    Some of them just want medical coverage.

    I thought the whole purpose of social programs was to take care of the needy?
    Why are we now rejecting it?
    Because why do that when you can just have UHC and a private option?

    Quote Originally Posted by Harry Guerrilla View Post
    Incorrect.
    They are pooling money and providing a service.

    It seems you checked your otherwise extensive knowledge of economics, at the door.
    And no one pools money better than the government, which is why the government is often left the check when private insurance companies are unwilling to cover those who are high risk.
    Last edited by whysoserious; 12-07-11 at 06:08 PM.
    Ted Cruz is the dumbest person alive.

  4. #84
    Sage
    Harry Guerrilla's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Not affiliated with other libertarians.
    Last Seen
    09-01-17 @ 02:38 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    28,955

    Re: UHC vs Privatized Care

    Quote Originally Posted by whysoserious View Post
    Because why do that when you can just have UHC and a private option?



    And no one pools money better than the government, which is why the government is often left the check when private insurance companies are unwilling to cover those who are high risk.
    The government is a horrid "pooler of money."
    They've all but spent our pooled SS retirement funds.
    I was discovering that life just simply isn't fair and bask in the unsung glory of knowing that each obstacle overcome along the way only adds to the satisfaction in the end. Nothing great, after all, was ever accomplished by anyone sulking in his or her misery.
    —Adam Shepard

  5. #85
    Sage
    whysoserious's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Charlotte, NC
    Last Seen
    12-29-16 @ 03:02 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    8,170

    Re: UHC vs Privatized Care

    Quote Originally Posted by Harry Guerrilla View Post
    The government is a horrid "pooler of money."
    They've all but spent our pooled SS retirement funds.
    No, that's spending, not pooling. They can pool the **** out of some money, and because of that, they can deal with high-risk candidates much better as well.
    Ted Cruz is the dumbest person alive.

  6. #86
    Sage
    Harry Guerrilla's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Not affiliated with other libertarians.
    Last Seen
    09-01-17 @ 02:38 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    28,955

    Re: UHC vs Privatized Care

    Quote Originally Posted by whysoserious View Post
    No, that's spending, not pooling. They can pool the **** out of some money, and because of that, they can deal with high-risk candidates much better as well.
    Yea but if they spend all that pooled money, we still have to pay for the costs incurred by the program in place.
    I agree that they can pool resources well, but they are terrible, terrible managers of those funds.

    I have no problem with the government taking care of high risk people, that makes sense to me.
    I believe the programs that serve those high risk people, should be liberalized so that more high risk people can be covered.
    I've been involved with helping people in these programs and they are insanely stupid, with rules that trap the disabled in poverty.
    I was discovering that life just simply isn't fair and bask in the unsung glory of knowing that each obstacle overcome along the way only adds to the satisfaction in the end. Nothing great, after all, was ever accomplished by anyone sulking in his or her misery.
    —Adam Shepard

  7. #87
    Enemy Combatant
    Kandahar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Washington, DC
    Last Seen
    10-15-13 @ 08:47 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    20,688

    Re: UHC vs Privatized Care

    Quote Originally Posted by Harry Guerrilla View Post
    The government is a horrid "pooler of money."
    They've all but spent our pooled SS retirement funds.
    Social security has a much greater time delay: You pay in, and then a few decades later you theoretically get paid. It's unlikely that public health insurance would have that problem, because there would be no pooled funds to speak of for the government to waste. The government would be constantly collecting cash and using it to pay out claims. It could even be mandated by law to collect the premium that the actuaries determine will cover all of the costs...and if they don't collect enough then the next year they simply raise the premium.
    Are you coming to bed?
    I can't. This is important.
    What?
    Someone is WRONG on the internet! -XKCD

  8. #88
    Sage
    whysoserious's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Charlotte, NC
    Last Seen
    12-29-16 @ 03:02 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    8,170

    Re: UHC vs Privatized Care

    Quote Originally Posted by Harry Guerrilla View Post
    Yea but if they spend all that pooled money, we still have to pay for the costs incurred by the program in place.
    I agree that they can pool resources well, but they are terrible, terrible managers of those funds.
    So it is your argument that there is no way the government can be responsible enough with the money? I do understand why you feel that way and it is unfortunate that our government has been so reckless in the past as to lost that much credibility with many of its citizens.

    Quote Originally Posted by Harry Guerrilla View Post
    I have no problem with the government taking care of high risk people, that makes sense to me.
    I believe the programs that serve those high risk people, should be liberalized so that more high risk people can be covered.
    I've been involved with helping people in these programs and they are insanely stupid, with rules that trap the disabled in poverty.
    The problem I have with that is it seems when it is only the "leeching class" or moochers that get taken care of by the government, it is underfunded, money is stolen from the programs, conservatives hate it anyway, and they do not even receive good treatment (nor do the doctors get paid as they should). If we fix those issues, sure, but it's going to seem like the costs are inflated since we are insuring only high-risk individuals.
    Ted Cruz is the dumbest person alive.

  9. #89
    Sage
    Harry Guerrilla's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Not affiliated with other libertarians.
    Last Seen
    09-01-17 @ 02:38 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    28,955

    Re: UHC vs Privatized Care

    Quote Originally Posted by whysoserious View Post
    So it is your argument that there is no way the government can be responsible enough with the money? I do understand why you feel that way and it is unfortunate that our government has been so reckless in the past as to lost that much credibility with many of its citizens.
    It's 1 part government and 1 part unrealistic expectations of the citizenry.

    Quote Originally Posted by whysoserious View Post
    The problem I have with that is it seems when it is only the "leeching class" or moochers that get taken care of by the government, it is underfunded, money is stolen from the programs, conservatives hate it anyway, and they do not even receive good treatment (nor do the doctors get paid as they should). If we fix those issues, sure, but it's going to seem like the costs are inflated since we are insuring only high-risk individuals.
    I don't consider people, who stricken with faults of nature to be the "leeching class" or "moochers."
    Most, if not all, would gladly trade off their disability, in order to be functionally normal.

    We already cover these people, but we require them to draw a check, to fit into a restricted income category and we require some to have X amount of credits.

    As an example, a friend of mine has a son who was born with a liver enzyme condition.
    Now as long as his son takes his meds and nutrition supplements, while observing a specific diet, his son is great.
    The problem is that the meds cost a yearly mid range 5 figures, which would quickly max out an insurance max.

    So his son has to be on SSI, he's never had the chance to work to earn disability credits, because if he works and makes more than the federal poverty rate for 12 months, he will lose his SSI medical benefits, because he makes too much to qualify for the SSI check.
    Our system for the disabled is messed up.
    I was discovering that life just simply isn't fair and bask in the unsung glory of knowing that each obstacle overcome along the way only adds to the satisfaction in the end. Nothing great, after all, was ever accomplished by anyone sulking in his or her misery.
    —Adam Shepard

  10. #90
    I'm not-low all the time
    Kushinator's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    West Loop
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 11:42 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    16,254

    Re: UHC vs Privatized Care

    Quote Originally Posted by Manc Skipper View Post
    Universal coverage provides the widest risk pool for the lowest cost.
    This is true. However, i must note: A single payer system will be far too reliant on taxpayers to provide the funding needs for research and developing. Therefore, a competitive balance between both public and private health care initiatives, where the most high risk individuals (aka the elderly, or those afflicted from chronic disease) are kept off of private risk pools, so low risk individuals can actually pay a price for premiums that accurately reflect potential liabilities.
    It is not very unreasonable that the rich should contribute to the public expense, not only in proportion to their revenue, but something more than in that proportion.
    "Wealth of Nations," Book V, Chapter II, Part II, Article I, pg.911

Page 9 of 11 FirstFirst ... 7891011 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •