• 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!

Ocasio-Cortez calls question about how to pay for Medicare for all ‘puzzling’

Slavister said:
I did not. I told you how to pay for it. If you want to discuss a separate topic of quality and timeliness, not problem... US is in the middle of the pack on timeliness and quality, while spending by far the MOST of all.

View attachment 67243781
Click to expand...

Negative, that's PART OF HOW THEY PAY FOR IT. Rationing and delays.
 
Renae said:
Negative, that's PART OF HOW THEY PAY FOR IT. Rationing and delays.
Click to expand...

In fairness, that’s just baseless fear mongering. What you call “rationing and delays” are the same things private insurers and healthcare providers do today in the United States. The only difference is that money is the motivation behind it here.
 
Slavister said:
Not sure how (1) and (2) are arguments against Single-Payer. Insurance layer would in fact be eliminated and reduce a lot of complexity AND cost of current system.

Regarding (3), there are practices today that make good money with Medicare patients and don't go out of business. They are doing just fine. Why would they go out of business if it's Medicare for all? I have no idea why you added manufacturing jobs there.

Regarding (4), this works for many items, but noone shops around for a better priced MRI or better priced hospital bed when they are in an accident. Most people cannot reasonably compare 2 doctors and know which one is better and by how much; and no, bedside manner comparison is not enough in this case.
Click to expand...


1) Yes Insurance Works, BUT that is also what Insurance is... To "insure" in the event of a loss. WITH that RISK retention is a critical point of "insurance" when we took out "Risk Retention" and added in the exclusion of "Pre Existing Conditions" You effectively destroyed the WHOLE Insurance Health Care system. So yes single payer WOULD eliminate it.... ACA DID NOT and KILLED EVERYTHING.

3) Medicare patients as we see NOW Medicare and Medicaid are going to GO BROKE this was a sudo Universal system.... IT cannot survive in our nations climate. baby boomers, Those opting out. An unhealthy society. I added in Manufacturing Jobs, BECAUSE there are MORE Facets to Health Insurance than JUST Hospital Care.

3a) Manufacturers and distributors are PARAMOUNT to operations of Medical Services, Wheel Chairs, Beds, Diapers, And Tools and equipment, Sterilization, Diagnostics LABS. EVERYTHING Medical cost an obscene amount of money. Once you regulate MANY JOBS and cost of goods will be change DRASTICALLY. Manufactures to include Drug companies that out source generics will see HUGE amounts of revenue stream change THAT means consolidation BY the government, MEANING Private companies will close. THERE Is a HUGE trickle effect. That I notice a lot of politician dont want to talk about.

4) No One CAN... Shop We shop based on the specified PRICE that we pay monthly. Thats its the bottom line dollar for the NORMAL person. It is the Insurance CARRIER that is supposed to shop for us for pricing an MRI or a hospital bed.

4a) Kaiser, is an example. I pay $550 a month, compared to ABC insurance DEF Insurance, ABC is top of the lines but cost me $850 a month, I dont know how much their MRI is, nor hospital bed is. DEF is the lowest at $450 a month, But the deductibles are high, and the out of cost expenses is over the budget of sacrificing $100 more a month in the event of a catastrophic injury. I never will have to PAY and I would HOPE That Kaiser at $550 a month will handle the MRI and Bed cost regardless what it actually is. I have a $10 co-pay, Thats better than the $100 copay for company DEF


So Unless you chose NOT to go with a BOX Medical Plan and you went to a private doctor and paid out of pocket....MOST of then nation would NOT realize that a 30 second, Xray for my finger Cost $250. And the Doctor To interpret that it was or was not broken was $200 and for an Xray that took no more than 5 minutes to include the time it took to walk to the department, put on the lead vest and not move it cost $450.......
 
Napoleon said:
In fairness, that’s just baseless fear mongering. What you call “rationing and delays” are the same things private insurers and healthcare providers do today in the United States. The only difference is that money is the motivation behind it here.
Click to expand...
No they aren't fear mongering.

Do you know what the delay for an MRI is in Canada? Did you know the ENTIRE NATION of Canada has fewer MRI Machines then the city of Pittsburg?

Fear mongering my ass.
 
Renae said:
No they aren't fear mongering.

Do you know what the delay for an MRI is in Canada? Did you know the ENTIRE NATION of Canada has fewer MRI Machines then the city of Pittsburg?

Fear mongering my ass.
Click to expand...

Except the real world application of what you’re talking about is that the doctor is going to see the patient with a rupturing appendix before the patient with tennis elbow. And they’re also going to prioritize those there out of medical necessity vs some elective procedure. We do the same things here. So what?
 
Slavister said:
I don't believe any of it is relevant to my post.
Click to expand...
So your are ok with requiring a Physician to work for the government after he or she spent 4 years in college 4 years in medical school and 5 years or more in residency and fellowship and paid tens of thousands of dollars for there education. But you don’t want to discuss you job

You
 
Napoleon said:
Except the real world application of what you’re talking about is that the doctor is going to see the patient with a rupturing appendix before the patient with tennis elbow. And they’re also going to prioritize those there out of medical necessity vs some elective procedure. We do the same things here. So what?
Click to expand...

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/20...ip-replacement-patients-needlessly-suffering/
Hundreds of thousands of elderly people are needlessly suffering in pain while they wait for hip operations because care is being rationed by the NHS, leading doctors have warned.

The waiting list for hip, knee and other orthopaedic operations has risen by a quarter over the past eight years to more than half a million in 2016.

One in 10 people have to wait more than 18 weeks for surgery amid rising concern that NHS is deliberately delaying treatment because it is not seen as life threatening.
Click to expand...
What's pain, suffering, loss of quality of life matter ANYWAY right?
 
Renae said:
Negative, that's PART OF HOW THEY PAY FOR IT. Rationing and delays.
Click to expand...

I responded with proof. You respond with just rhetoric.
 
Renae said:
However, as noted in the article, even doubling income and corporate taxes wouldn't "just pay for it".

This is your democrat party, when you vote today, you vote Blue, this is who you're voting for, "politicians" without a ****ing clue.

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/oc...bout-how-to-pay-for-medicare-for-all-puzzling
Click to expand...

Not a ridiculous answer at all.... People currently pay for health insurance. This would be a matter of either buying into the medicare system or raising taxes such that the tax increase is line with what people currently pay for medical insurance.

People currently spend approximately $10K per year on healthcare (though there is a wide range on a per person basis), so there is a lot to work with.
 
SLC said:
So your are ok with requiring a Physician to work for the government after he or she spent 4 years in college 4 years in medical school and 5 years or more in residency and fellowship and paid tens of thousands of dollars for there education. But you don’t want to discuss you job
Click to expand...

First, our physician education should in fact be more targeted (AND less costly per year as well). It takes 6 years in Europe to get an MD after high school. Very very few programs in US try to do the same. In any case, to your main point, no, I would not REQUIRE anything of a physician. It's a free country. If they WANT to be a physician, they can open up their own practice and take as many Medicare-for-all patients as they want, even 0 if they want to target only high-worth clients paying cash. Their admin costs would be much less though than dealing with dozens of healthcare companies and plans and their administrative staff would be much less reduced and they would have MORE TIME to concentrate on practicing the craft.
 
Renae said:
However, as noted in the article, even doubling income and corporate taxes wouldn't "just pay for it".
Click to expand...

Exactice said:
Kaiser, is an example. I pay $550 a month, compared to ABC insurance DEF Insurance, ABC is top of the lines but cost me $850 a month, I dont know how much their MRI is, nor hospital bed is. DEF is the lowest at $450 a month, But the deductibles are high, and the out of cost expenses is over the budget of sacrificing $100 more a month in the event of a catastrophic injury. I never will have to PAY and I would HOPE That Kaiser at $550 a month will handle the MRI and Bed cost regardless what it actually is. I have a $10 co-pay, Thats better than the $100 copay for company DEF
Click to expand...

RabidAlpaca said:
I've lived in Germany for nearly a decade now, and while my family in friends in the states are literally dying or going bankrupt because they can't afford the healthcare they need, every person I know in Germany has full coverage at a fraction of the cost and just waves their card when they need anything.
Click to expand...

Almost 100% of Universal HealthCare discussions never talk about the other hidden costs of our current system: TIME costs. In Universal HealthCare countries, people indeed just wave their card and that's it. This is unimaginable to most people in USA apparently. Here, countless hours and days and weeks are spent by patients and their families not only figuring out each year which plan to sign up for but also being middlemen between doctor's billing offices and hospital billing offices and insurance customer services, etc, etc. A lot of TIME (and stress) is WASTED on all this overhead that rest of civilized world is simply not familiar with.

Even with Medicare plans run by insurance companies, what should be a simple switch from one private insurance to another easily takes an hour and sometimes much more if there is a screw up along the way. And that's the easiest thing of all.

If you want to actually pick among the dozens of private insurance medicare plans, not only do you need to figure if all your doctors take whichever plan you are thinking of, not only do you need to figure out which of your drugs are in which tier for which plan and how much each costs, not only do you have to figure which healthcare facilities take which insurances, you also have to compare all the other pricing and services and a lot of other information... if you actually want to be a "smart" shopper.
 
Slavister said:
Almost 100% of Universal HealthCare discussions never talk about the other hidden costs of our current system: TIME costs. In Universal HealthCare countries, people indeed just wave their card and that's it. This is unimaginable to most people in USA apparently. Here, countless hours and days and weeks are spent by patients and their families not only figuring out each year which plan to sign up for but also being middlemen between doctor's billing offices and hospital billing offices and insurance customer services, etc, etc. A lot of TIME (and stress) is WASTED on all this overhead that rest of civilized world is simply not familiar with.

Even with Medicare plans run by insurance companies, what should be a simple switch from one private insurance to another easily takes an hour and sometimes much more if there is a screw up along the way. And that's the easiest thing of all.

If you want to actually pick among the dozens of private insurance medicare plans, not only do you need to figure if all your doctors take whichever plan you are thinking of, not only do you need to figure out which of your drugs are in which tier for which plan and how much each costs, not only do you have to figure which healthcare facilities take which insurances, you also have to compare all the other pricing and services and a lot of other information... if you actually want to be a "smart" shopper.
Click to expand...

With all your points... Your last one is... "Fact"


YOU NEED TO BE Responsible for your OWN choices, meaning Smart Shopping, risk vs reward and voting educated.


ACA Was NONE of it....We need a MAJOR overhaul and a MAJOR one fast....We are broke and there are MORE that will suffer should it collapse.

Its IN OUR hands not to just hope and pray a politicians does something nice. for a select amount of people.....
 
jonny5 said:
So then her answer should be, she would raise taxes.
Click to expand...
Of course.

Most people would gladly trade paying separate bills to private companies providing fire, police or garbage pickup for a single tax bill. (Can you imaging having to pay a monthly bill to the fire department? ... No, please just include it in my property tax.)

Therefore question is - Will people be willing to make that same trade for healthcare? Instead of paying the doctor, the lab (for results), the hospital, the pharmacy or mail-in service, etc., etc. - Would you prefer that all instead just be included in your taxes as a lump sum?
 
Ocasio-Cortez is an liberal and not a very intelligent one. She has imbarassed herself so many times in interviews over things she doesn't know, doesn't understand or simply has no answer for a question asked. We will just pay of it. It will bankrupt the country and she has no idea of why.
 
Exactice said:
With all your points... Your last one is... "Fact"


YOU NEED TO BE Responsible for your OWN choices, meaning Smart Shopping, risk vs reward and voting educated.


ACA Was NONE of it....We need a MAJOR overhaul and a MAJOR one fast....We are broke and there are MORE that will suffer should it collapse.

Its IN OUR hands not to just hope and pray a politicians does something nice. for a select amount of people.....
Click to expand...

I agree for the most part. I do think ACA moved us in the right direction, with Single Payer being the ultimate desired destination.
 
Renae said:
You misunderstand Ocasio-Cortez's presentation. Though Fox News is doing it's best to obfusticate.
Medicare-For-All would command additional taxpayer dollars, but it would be recouping the dollars that are currently spent privately.

In that, Ocasio-Cortez would be presenting the question to the voter/taxpayer: "Do you prefer to pay $10,000 for a surgery to the hospital; or $8,000 to Medicare for the same surgery?"
... and arguing for the latter.

Now some people would say "yes" and some people would say "no," but what Ocasio-Cortez is not say is that she doesn't have a clue where the money will come from.
Click to expand...
You forgot to add in the up to two year wait, suffering and the cost that has, but hey your "medical" care is "free".
Click to expand...

It's not free. It's cheaper. Likewise, EMS trips or cancer won't put you into bankruptcy.
 
Slavister said:
First, our physician education should in fact be more targeted (AND less costly per year as well). It takes 6 years in Europe to get an MD after high school. Very very few programs in US try to do the same. In any case, to your main point, no, I would not REQUIRE anything of a physician. It's a free country. If they WANT to be a physician, they can open up their own practice and take as many Medicare-for-all patients as they want, even 0 if they want to target only high-worth clients paying cash. Their admin costs would be much less though than dealing with dozens of healthcare companies and plans and their administrative staff would be much less reduced and they would have MORE TIME to concentrate on practicing the craft.
Click to expand...
You are aware that isn’t how single payer works. Case in point remember the plan Hillary pushed when Bill was president. It would have been a felony. For the patient to pay cash and for the doctor to accept cash. The only way a single payer works is for it to be the only game in town and force the doctors to work for that single payer. My question to you would like to pay for your own education and then be forced to work for the government that had total control over your income. And would you spend over a decade of your life to qualify for that job.
 
Casca XV said:
There are no secret taxes. The Left leaning governments desperate to look more successful than they are just don't count them.

On the other hand, American stats are usually provided by government bureaucrats who want us in socialized healthcare.
Click to expand...

Napoleon said:
Nobody is talking about “secret” taxes. You have over $3 trillion in government revenue to raise annually to pay for this system so how do you plan to do that? I would think like most other countries with the UHC you so desperately want to emulate - huge payroll tax rates. The way to do that here would be a 30% Medicare tax for everyone. But that’s something you and others refuse to disclose or admit. Instead you throw out a fallacious argument that goes more or less as follows:

Current system: I pay $10,000 in healthcare costs annually. You’re an invalid and pay $25,000 in healthcare costs annually to keep yourself alive.

UHC: Both of us pay $15,000 in payroll taxes annually for universal healthcare. UHC is cheaper!

You think it’s worth celebrating because combined costs are lower under UHC. I say codswallop. Who cares unless you’re the invalid? The main thing you refuse to admit is that individual costs skyrocket for most people because of the payroll taxes required to support it. I’m not the invalid. 30% of my income doesn’t go to healthcare under the current system.
Click to expand...

Taxes are itemized, as in, it's ear-marked for specific purposes and is highly trackable. We have the most expensive system in the world, you can not deny that FACT. There is no "secret fund" of taxes redirecting to make it cheaper, it's literally cheaper everywhere else. Please educate yourself about the facts and stop with this secret tax conspiracy nonsense.

Fishking said:
All these countries you speak of spend squat on their national defense but instead relies on the U.S. $$ to be responsible for their national defense. I would honestly not mind if we almost completely pulled out of Europe and Asia and let them deal their their own defense and we could have more money to pay for this type of thing.
Click to expand...

Every other system in the world costs less than ours, so I don't know why you think you'd need more money.

RetiredUSN said:
We have the most expensive highways and bridges also and we can't afford to fix them.

But of course your healthcare pipe dream will come in on budget....right? :roll:
Click to expand...

Every other first world country managed to do it, literally dozens of countries. You must really hate America to think we could never do what everyone else already figured out.
 
Renae said:
This is your democrat party, when you vote today, you vote Blue, this is who you're voting for, "politicians" without a ****ing clue.
Click to expand...

Trump (as president): ‘Nobody knew that health care could be so complicated’

Your posts are such trash Renae. Cortez is a cog in the wheel, and is correct - we'd pay for it. Trump is a ****ing moron, and was elected president, and admitted he had no idea health care was complicated, and failed to repeal/replace. Get something right...anything..please.
 
brothern said:
Of course.

Most people would gladly trade paying separate bills to private companies providing fire, police or garbage pickup for a single tax bill. (Can you imaging having to pay a monthly bill to the fire department? ... No, please just include it in my property tax.)

Therefore question is - Will people be willing to make that same trade for healthcare? Instead of paying the doctor, the lab (for results), the hospital, the pharmacy or mail-in service, etc., etc. - Would you prefer that all instead just be included in your taxes as a lump sum?
Click to expand...

Personally, I would not. I like knowing how much Im paying for things, so that I can competitively shop and drop things I dont want to pay for or dont use.

But I imagine most people probably are the latter, they want to just hand over control of their life to govt so they can get back to social media.
 
jonny5 said:
Personally, I would not. I like knowing how much Im paying for things, so that I can competitively shop and drop things I dont want to pay for or dont use.

But I imagine most people probably are the latter, they want to just hand over control of their life to govt so they can get back to social media.
Click to expand...
I absolutely would, on the other hand. Medical services are not like shopping for couches.
If I'm having a heart attack, I'm not on PriceCompare.com on my phone competitively pricing hospitals.
 
RabidAlpaca said:
Every other UHC country on earth, literally dozens of countries, manage to have a healthcare system where every man, woman and child in the country has full, high quality coverage at less than HALF THE COST per capita of what we pay. Stop pretending that UHC costs more, we have the most expensive healthcare system in the world yet are nowhere near the top in healthcare outcomes or life expectancy and are near dead last among first world countries for percentage covered. Your distraction is rejected.
Click to expand...

We (the USA) also have very expensive public colleges, universities and K-12 schools - simply changing who pays a bill does not automagically lower that bill. Your argument is much like saying that giving everyone SNAP (EBT cards) would lower grocery (food) costs when reality is that it would either have no effect or raise them.
 
Renae said:
However, as noted in the article, even doubling income and corporate taxes wouldn't "just pay for it".

This is your democrat party, when you vote today, you vote Blue, this is who you're voting for, "politicians" without a ****ing clue.

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/oc...bout-how-to-pay-for-medicare-for-all-puzzling
Click to expand...

It is not as if Trump had any specifics on how he would lower costs and cover everybody or what, exactly, the republicants had in mind to 'replace' PPACA. She is convinced (was told?) that UHC (M4A?) is less expensive and thus "it" essentially pays for "itself". That is the problem with many 'basic concepts' - they immediately lose their magical (unicorn like?) properties when they must be converted to actual legislation.
 
ttwtt78640 said:
It is not as if Trump had any specifics on how he would lower costs and cover everybody or what, exactly, the republicants had in mind to 'replace' PPACA. She is convinced (was told?) that UHC (M4A?) is less expensive and thus "it" essentially pays for "itself". That is the problem with many 'basic concepts' - they immediately lose their magical (unicorn like?) properties when they must be converted to actual legislation.
Click to expand...

The real problem is Gov't in the healthcare business at all.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom