• 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!

My Definitive Pre-Debate Rankings of the Democratic Presidential Candidates

Nah, but I'll settle for an apology and you promising to read a full 3 sentence post before making dumb replies.

An apology? Sure: "I'm sorry you're so grumpy!".

There - all better :)
 
It's not that I'm against any of that, but a lot of it will be very difficult to legislate, and the numbers are just way too big to do single payer without massive tax increases. But in general, what you're pointing out is the drafting of single payer will be a massive challenge, and the devil will be in the details, which are basically napkin length sketches at this point.

Agreed I don't think it will be easy...there was what almost 10 years of marching in the streets and fighting about the ACA. Lawsuit after lawsuit then all of a sudden in 2018 the same people demonizing it were running ads saying the opposite.
We live in crazy town when we all admit that I think things will start to change.
 
The problem is that at some point someone needs to move beyond the "negotiating power" euphemism and lay out the differences in the cost structure of the American health system and those of cheaper OECD systems: higher wages and abundant employment; greater capacity and access for things like hospitals, medical equipment, specialty and sub-specialty care, expensive technologies; faster access to and greater use of new medications and more expensive interventions.

It could be that people will clamor for government intervention to reverse this. Some groundswell of "There's too many unoccupied beds in my local hospital, let's close it down and re-direct!" or "The compensation of these unionized nurses is excessive, let's pool our negotiating power to take them down a peg!" or whatever. But as far as I can tell nobody is putting the question to them.

Right now folks seem happy to imply we're going to keep our high cost structure while also declining to pay for it. They'll tell you the health sector will continue to be our primary jobs engine without acknowledging that's the problem they're trying to fix! Someone at some point will need to step up and say "I think we should dismantle some of what we've gotten used to and instead move to a lower-cost system, and here's what that entails..."

I have no idea why you think negotiating for lower drug prices, professional medical equipment and durable medical supplies are a euphemism but okay.
Not everything is a zero sum game if you think hospitals have to close and healthcare professionals have to take less pay when more people get treatment for things they die early from now well I guess there is no conversation to be had.
By the way tell me why should nurses be paid more than teachers? Nowadays most teachers need advanced degrees and expensive license procedures to teach while 2 year nursing schools are churning them out by the 1000's.
 
I have no idea why you think negotiating for lower drug prices, professional medical equipment and durable medical supplies are a euphemism but okay.
Not everything is a zero sum game if you think hospitals have to close and healthcare professionals have to take less pay when more people get treatment for things they die early from now well I guess there is no conversation to be had.
By the way tell me why should nurses be paid more than teachers? Nowadays most teachers need advanced degrees and expensive license procedures to teach while 2 year nursing schools are churning them out by the 1000's.

I haven't taken a position on what nurses' pay should be (other than that we ought to be careful about artificially bumping it up, and health spending along with it: Should states mandate nurse staffing ratios?). But if we want to build a monopsony to "negotiate" down that pay it's worth some public discussion. And a primary would be the time do it.
 
I haven't taken a position on what nurses' pay should be (other than that we ought to be careful about artificially bumping it up, and health spending along with it: Should states mandate nurse staffing ratios?). But if we want to build a monopsony to "negotiate" down that pay it's worth some public discussion. And a primary would be the time do it.

Here's the thing why would nurses pay need to be negotiated down when there are so many other things that besides peoples actual pay that could be negotiated to reasonable prices.
 
I don't really agree. I have some definite opinions in the Democratic primary and unless it's over by the time I vote (our primary is pretty late), I want to express them. IMO that's more important than making Trump's margin 80-20 versus 85-15 in the GOP primary. If someone strong runs on the GOP, I'd consider changing my mind, but I have not seen ANYONE yet.

Since your primary is pretty late, if Trump still has an opponent by the time it rolls over your way, that opponent is probably strong enough to make Trump sweat. Once again, it's about weakening Trump for as long as possible before the general. Anyway, just MO.
 
The problem is that at some point someone needs to move beyond the "negotiating power" euphemism and lay out the differences in the cost structure of the American health system and those of cheaper OECD systems: higher wages and abundant employment; greater capacity and access for things like hospitals, medical equipment, specialty and sub-specialty care, expensive technologies; faster access to and greater use of new medications and more expensive interventions.

It could be that people will clamor for government intervention to reverse this. Some groundswell of "There's too many unoccupied beds in my local hospital, let's close it down and re-direct!" or "The compensation of these unionized nurses is excessive, let's pool our negotiating power to take them down a peg!" or whatever. But as far as I can tell nobody is putting the question to them.

Right now folks seem happy to imply we're going to keep our high cost structure while also declining to pay for it. They'll tell you the health sector will continue to be our primary jobs engine without acknowledging that's the problem they're trying to fix! Someone at some point will need to step up and say "I think we should dismantle some of what we've gotten used to and instead move to a lower-cost system, and here's what that entails..."

Even if you cherrypick the very best of American healthcare in the few states where the US outperforms most of the OECD, it doesn't outperform all of the OECD, while also being vastly more expensive.

Promoting the idea that we have to pay ludicrously more money in order to receive comparable healthcare is at best ignorant, and knowing, cynical fearmongering at worst. I suspect in your case and per your posting history, and the fact that you're clearly not a mouthbreathing idiot despite your insistence on arguing and making points like one, it's the latter.

Smearing MFA/UHC proponents as declining to pay for their proposals is likewise, and I'm certainly not the only one on this forum alone that has been forthright about the need to get costs under control, whether that is labour, administration or otherwise. Bernie certainly hasn't shied from being forthcoming about the fact that there will indeed be higher taxes to pay beyond the uber rich in order to support such a system. Moreover, even if we were to keep healthcare wages and employment as high as they are, for the sake of argument, there would still be significant savings in eliminating insurer middle men alone, and instilling the government with centralized powers of negotiation.

EDIT: Looks like Middle Ground already mentioned this; good on her.

Also, people are already clamouring for govt intervention to replace by far the most inefficient healthcare system the world has ever known.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top Bottom