• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Are You in Favor of a Single Payer Health Care System?

Do You Support a Single Payer Health Care System?

  • Total voters
    63
ksu_aviator said:
Let me ask you this, if the government said you have the right to speak out politically, but only through one of our sponsored websites...would you have the right to free speech?
Click to expand...

Using your rather wierd analogy terms, we would be providing more opportunity for everyone to free speech, whereas the current system limits free speect to only those that have the big bucks.

I prefer free speech for all of we the people. :sun
 
Harry Guerrilla said:
Because people tend to lump, solely medical related problems with personal life style problems and call it "poorer rated health care system."

Fat people don't get fat because they have ****ty medical care, they get fat because they eat to much food, but their problems from being to fat, are medical in nature.
Click to expand...

Perhaps you should start your own rating system. For myself, I am going with the system that provides the best care for the most people at the lowest cost. Our current system has become unafforable not only for poor people but for much of the middle class. Its time to walk into the 21st century with the rest of the first world nations.
 
Catawba said:
Using your rather wierd analogy terms, we would be providing more opportunity for everyone to free speech, whereas the current system limits free speect to only those that have the big bucks.

I prefer free speech for all of we the people. :sun
Click to expand...

Is it free speech? If the government controls the how, who, when, what and where?
 
Catawba said:
Perhaps you should start your own rating system. For myself, I am going with the system that provides the best care for the most people at the lowest cost. Our current system has become unafforable not only for poor people but for much of the middle class. Its time to walk into the 21st century with the rest of the first world nations.
Click to expand...

Except that's not even true otherwise approximately 100% of the population wouldn't have insurance or access to medical care.

The last part is a loaded statement, assuming that only a nation can be modern if it has UHC, we already know that's false.

You're making a circular argument, where you can't counter the points I raise, so you revert back to making illogical emotionally laden responses, that are intended to be debate killers.
 
ksu_aviator said:
Is it free speech? If the government controls the how, who, when, what and where?
Click to expand...

Evidently, my paranoia level is not that high, I don't see that happening. What I see is a system that only the well to do have access to.
 
Dittohead not! said:
But, what we need to do is listen to people who live in the countries that have universal care. I know that there are some on this board. Anyone from Canada, Australia, the UK, or anywhere else with UHC wanting to trade your system for ours? Anyone? Go ahead, respond to the post and tell us just how anxious you are to dump UHC for a US style of health care system.
Click to expand...

So far, the sound of crickets, somewhere far off a train whistle, otherwise silence.

I've asked that same question on forums before, and never once had a positive response.
 
Dittohead not! said:
So far, the sound of crickets, somewhere far off a train whistle, otherwise silence.

I've asked that same question on forums before, and never once had a positive response.
Click to expand...


Evidence of real life preference for UHC just gives more creedence to the studies that show our health care system is the most expensive and lesser rated systems in the world.

I think that is why it is being ignored. :sun
 
Harry Guerrilla said:
Except that's not even true otherwise approximately 100% of the population wouldn't have insurance or access to medical care.
Click to expand...


Your statement is what is "not true" - the uber-wealthy would not have a problem paying the premiums, no matter how high the premiums rise, ergo, you would never have 100% of the population not able to afford expensive insurance. And that is almost what we have, only the upper-middle class and wealthy can afford the cost of insurance in the US that covers a person most meaningfully.
 
mertex said:
Your statement is what is "not true" - the uber-wealthy would not have a problem paying the premiums, no matter how high the premiums rise, ergo, you would never have 100% of the population not able to afford expensive insurance. And that is almost what we have, only the upper-middle class and wealthy can afford the cost of insurance in the US that covers a person most meaningfully.
Click to expand...

Errrr, no.
Not even close, most people (I think it's 75%) are happy with their insurance.
But that's an aside, everyone has access to medical care if they need it.
 
Harry Guerrilla said:
Errrr, no.
Not even close, most people (I think it's 75%) are happy with their insurance.
Click to expand...

75% of those that are rich enought to afford it are happy with it. What an endorsement!

But that's an aside, everyone has access to medical care if they need it.
Click to expand...


And its never further away than their nearest emergency room right?
 
Harry Guerrilla said:
Errrr, no.
Not even close, most people (I think it's 75%) are happy with their insurance.
But that's an aside, everyone has access to medical care if they need it.
Click to expand...

If you count the ability to go to the emergency room, then skip out on the bill, as "access to medical care", then yes, they do, for now. How much more can the costs go up before the whole system, if that's what it can be called, simply begins to collapse?
 
Catawba said:
75% of those that are rich enought to afford it are happy with it. What an endorsement!
Click to expand...

That's a gross exaggeration of reality.
There is at least 1 cash doctors office in the next town that does office visits for $50.

Not exactly appealing to "the rich."

Catawba said:
And its never further away than their nearest emergency room right?
Click to expand...

Or a la carte doctors office, free clinic, etc.
This whole health care panic is a farce.
 
Dittohead not! said:
If you count the ability to go to the emergency room, then skip out on the bill, as "access to medical care", then yes, they do, for now. How much more can the costs go up before the whole system, if that's what it can be called, simply begins to collapse?
Click to expand...

Is it not access to medical care?
But of course you discount or eliminate, all the other alternatives, from your analysis.

It won't collapse, you're being ridiculous. :roll:
 
Harry Guerrilla said:
Is it not access to medical care?
But of course you discount or eliminate, all the other alternatives, from your analysis.

It won't collapse, you're being ridiculous. :roll:
Click to expand...

It can't keep increasing in cost the way it has been for the past couple of decades without some severe consequences.
 
Dittohead not! said:
It can't keep increasing in cost the way it has been for the past couple of decades without some severe consequences.
Click to expand...

Yea, it will continue to increase in cost until, people stop paying for extra procedures and/or the government cuts off Medicare.

Medicare is the primary force behind the cost increases, if the president had made a bill that just cut Medicare services and had not passed the doc fix, medical care prices would of eventually stabilized after the baby boomer shock to the system.
 
Harry Guerrilla said:
Yea, it will continue to increase in cost until, people stop paying for extra procedures and/or the government cuts off Medicare.

Medicare is the primary force behind the cost increases, if the president had made a bill that just cut Medicare services and had not passed the doc fix, medical care prices would of eventually stabilized after the baby boomer shock to the system.
Click to expand...

Hence, your suggestion that no one over 70 get medical care. I have to admit, that would indeed bring costs down. It would save social security a ton of money, too.
 
Dittohead not! said:
Hence, your suggestion that no one over 70 get medical care. I have to admit, that would indeed bring costs down. It would save social security a ton of money, too.
Click to expand...

It doesn't have to go that far, but the political will to do the right thing doesn't exist.

Elderly people are the largest voting block, any adjustments to Medicare will cause whomever is in charge at that time to lose their job.
That is why I am firmly against programs like Medicare (or any UHC), reasonable change can't be made until we get to emergency mode.
 
Harry Guerrilla said:
Or a la carte doctors office, free clinic, etc.
This whole health care panic is a farce.
Click to expand...

Just leave it charity to be responsible for the poor and the middle class right? Just as long as the rich get to retain access to the platinum club! You are too much! :sun
 
Catawba said:
Free clinics are funded through voluntary donations (charity).
Click to expand...

A la carte doctors offices are not, they offer pricing for service and are typically designed to appeal to the lower income segments of society.

These places exist, they are fairly "renewed" because before the advent of 3rd party insurers, open pricing for medical services was common and affordable no less.
 
Harry Guerrilla said:
A la carte doctors offices are not, they offer pricing for service and are typically designed to appeal to the lower income segments of society.

These places exist, they are fairly "renewed" because before the advent of 3rd party insurers, open pricing for medical services was common and affordable no less.
Click to expand...


What would the a la carte pricing be for cancer surgery and treatment today?
 
Catawba said:
What would the a la carte pricing be for cancer surgery and treatment today?
Click to expand...

There's no way for me to know, the price model has be skewed by the constant and consistent intervention of both government and other 3rd party payers.

But that doesn't mean there would be 0 insurance, there could be catastrophic insurance just for cancer, any other costly medical issue.

Insurance has was created to mitigate high cost risks, getting a flu shot is not a high cost risk, getting a physical isn't either.
With coverage mandates from states and now the federal government, we have completely obliterated the pricing structure, it causes over consumption and leaves the consumer uncaring of the true cost involved.
 
Harry Guerrilla said:
There's no way for me to know, the price model has be skewed by the constant and consistent intervention of both government and other 3rd party payers.

But that doesn't mean there would be 0 insurance, there could be catastrophic insurance just for cancer, any other costly medical issue.

Insurance has was created to mitigate high cost risks, getting a flu shot is not a high cost risk, getting a physical isn't either.
With coverage mandates from states and now the federal government, we have completely obliterated the pricing structure, it causes over consumption and leaves the consumer uncaring of the true cost involved.
Click to expand...

Where have you been??? The middle class has been unable to afford more than catastrophic insurance for years, and many can't afford that!!!!

Our health care system has priced 1/6 of our people out of adequate health care.
 
Harry Guerrilla said:
It doesn't have to go that far,
Click to expand...


Let's hope not:shock:

Harry Guerrilla said:
but the political will to do the right thing doesn't exist.
Click to expand...

Nor does the agreement over what the "right thing" is.

Harry Guerrilla said:
Elderly people are the largest voting block, any adjustments to Medicare will cause whomever is in charge at that time to lose their job.
Click to expand...


And don't you forget it, sonny. We seniors vote!

Harry Guerrilla said:
That is why I am firmly against programs like Medicare (or any UHC), reasonable change can't be made until we get to emergency mode.
Click to expand...

Except that seniors are mostly retired, so don't have employee health care any more, and nobody but no body is going to want to sell health insurance to seniors. Ending Medicare is tantamount to ending medical care for seniors.

So, remember what you said: We vote. Suck it up.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom