• 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!

Healthcare profiteering - rip off in plain sight.

jaeger19 said:
Stop lying.. you have been proven wrong. The Canadian government healthcare system does not cover the same things.
Click to expand...

Of course it does. At the province level. Even medicaid is not fully paid for by the federal government and coverage and eligibility varies by state.


Deny that
 
We subscribe to capitalism and the form of free markets that are said to be conducive to it.

What if,

we solve simple poverty on an at-will basis through unemployment compensation in our at-will employment States to ensure full employment of resources in our market based economy?

Any adult could then have an income with which to automatically stabilize our economy through more consistent market based participation.
 
vegas giants said:
Of course it does. At the province level. Even medicaid is not fully paid for by the federal government and coverage and eligibility varies by state.


Deny that
Click to expand...

Yep.. provinces and territories sometimes do. Thats not the Canadian government.. anymore than Idaho state government equals the US government.

Deny that.
 
rahl said:
which is about cancer survival rates. Try again.
Click to expand...

Bingo.. So.. its still a peer reviewed paper. and you haven't offered anything to refute it.. . and therefore.. I am right. Just using your logic.
 
jaeger19 said:
Bingo.. So.. its still a peer reviewed paper. and you haven't offered anything to refute it.. . and therefore.. I am right. Just using your logic.
Click to expand...

I accept your concession
 
jaeger19 said:
Yep.. provinces and territories sometimes do. Thats not the Canadian government.. anymore than Idaho state government equals the US government.

Deny that.
Click to expand...

ITS CALLED A FEDERAL/PROVINCIAL PARTNERSHIP. Something it seems is an alien concept in America.
 
rahl said:
I accept your concession
Click to expand...

I accept your concession... refute my peer reviewed paper.

Wow.. this is easy. I see why you do it.. you really don't have to understand the paper you present.. and you can claim that it means anything you want it to.. even when the other debator shows you are wrong.

Of course it makes you look foolish... but that doesn't seem to matter to you. Have a nice day.

If you do ever get the strength up to debate.. just answer the question... why should a person with medicare and Medicaid.. want to switch to Canadian single payer insurance which covers way less than US medicare or Medicaid.
 
jaeger19 said:
I accept your concession... refute my peer reviewed paper.
Click to expand...
Why? I agree we have excellent cancer survival rates. Now, post something which refutes the one I gave you, showing single payer systems provide better care at a fraction of the cost of ours.
 
Jonsa said:
ITS CALLED A FEDERAL/PROVINCIAL PARTNERSHIP. Something it seems is an alien concept in America.
Click to expand...

Well actually its not. In the US.. we actually have a federal and state partnership.. its called Medicaid. ITs financed both by the state and federal government and its managed by the state with federal guidelines.
 
rahl said:
Why? I agree we have excellent cancer survival rates. Now, post something which refutes the one I gave you, showing single payer systems provide better care at a fraction of the cost of ours.
Click to expand...

Nope.. you didn't post a paper that refuted my peer review... and so until you do that.. there is nothing to discuss.

Just like when I pointed out that your paper DOES NOT show that single payer provides better care at a fraction of a cost.

IF THEY DID.. then you would be able to answer WHY a Medicaid or medicare patient should want to switch Canadian Single payer.. even though it provides less coverage than their current Medicaid or medicare.

By the way.. if single payer systems provide better care at a fraction of the cost of ours.. why are our cancer survival rates are excellent compared to Europe? IF what you say is true.. then they should be way worse than single payer systems.. but they aren't.

That's because is NOT true to say that single payer systems provide better care at a fraction of a cost of ours. Single payer systems are better IF YOU DON:T HAVE INSURANCE because single payer generally means universal healthcare.
If we went to a universal system here.. where we didn't have 13% without insurance.. without a doubt.. we would like score better on the metrics that we score low on compared to countries that have universal healthcare.. metrics like "equity of care".

But.. you haven't read your "peer reviewed paper"..and so you can't have that discussion.. you don't want to have that discussion so you run..

So run away..
 
jaeger19 said:
Well actually its not. In the US.. we actually have a federal and state partnership.. its called Medicaid. ITs financed both by the state and federal government and its managed by the state with federal guidelines.
Click to expand...

Oh, thanks for the correction. So there is an existing infrastructure, that could readily be expanded to universal healthcare, in America, and still leave a robust private medical sector for what isn't covered by it?
 
jaeger19 said:
Nope.. you didn't post a paper that refuted my peer review... and so until you do that.. there is nothing to discuss...
Click to expand...
I accept your concession.
 
Jonsa said:
Oh, thanks for the correction. So there is an existing infrastructure, that could readily be expanded to universal healthcare, in America, and still leave a robust private medical sector for what isn't covered by it?
Click to expand...

Yes. We almost achieved it with Obamacare getting to about 10% without coverage. . unfortunately since then.. it has been chipped away at. but otherwise yep.

and actually the existing infrastructure covers pretty much covers everything that private insurance covers.. if not more.
 
rahl said:
I accept your concession.
Click to expand...

Too funny.. at this point.. whatever makes you feel better about yourself. If you ever care to actually participate in debate.. I'll be here.

Good luck to you.
 
jaeger19 said:
Yes. We almost achieved it with Obamacare getting to about 10% without coverage. . unfortunately since then.. it has been chipped away at. but otherwise yep.

and actually the existing infrastructure covers pretty much covers everything that private insurance covers.. if not more.
Click to expand...

well that would make it way way better than ours.

About 30% of services aren't covered under our medicare system. Like the US most employers offer complementary private insurance for things like dentist, eyeglasses, drugs, private rooms, physiotherapy, chiropractic. and those kinds of plans can also be purchase individually.
 
jaeger19 said:
Too funny.. at this point.. whatever makes you feel better about yourself. If you ever care to actually participate in debate.. I'll be here.

Good luck to you.
Click to expand...

I gave you a peer reviewed paper showing single payer systems are superior to ours. You gave me a paper about cancer survival rates. You remain refuted.
 
Jonsa said:
well that would make it way way better than ours.

About 30% of services aren't covered under our medicare system. Like the US most employers offer complementary private insurance for things like dentist, eyeglasses, drugs, private rooms, physiotherapy, chiropractic. and those kinds of plans can also be purchase individually.
Click to expand...

Bingo. That's what I have been explaining to people. Your healthcare system is superior is some ways because you have everyone covered with some basic coverage.

But.. for most people in America with insurance.. your single payer would be worse.. since your Canadian single payer does not pay for a lot of things that our Medicaid and medicare, and VA systems do.
Most people in America would be completely pissed to be on the Canadian system. Now.. if you don't have insurance in America? Okay then.. the CAnadian single payer is good for you.

There is no free lunch here with single payer. there are always trade offs.
 
rahl said:
I gave you a peer reviewed paper showing single payer systems are superior to ours. You gave me a paper about cancer survival rates. You remain refuted.
Click to expand...

No you didn't give me a peer reviewed paper "showing that single payer systems were superior to ours"..

You gave me a peer reviewed paper that shows that for some countries single payer does SOME things better. Like efficient care.. and equality of care. It also shows that countries single payer does some things WORSE.. like timeliness of care and effective care. And your paper does not prove any improvements are due to single payer.. it may simply be because most single payer countries have universal healthcare. (i.e. everyone covered)

IF what you said were true.. that across the board.. single payer was simply better than the US.. and provided better care.. then you should be able to explain why a patient with Medicaid and Medicare in this country.. would love to change to Canadian single payer.. even though they are going to have less covered under it.. versus what they have now.

But you can't and you run from the challenge like a frightened kitten. Nope.. you keep saying "I have a peer reviewed paper"..when you have no clue what the data in that paper actually says.
 
jaeger19 said:
Bingo. That's what I have been explaining to people. Your healthcare system is superior is some ways because you have everyone covered with some basic coverage.

But.. for most people in America with insurance.. your single payer would be worse.. since your Canadian single payer does not pay for a lot of things that our Medicaid and medicare, and VA systems do.
Most people in America would be completely pissed to be on the Canadian system. Now.. if you don't have insurance in America? Okay then.. the CAnadian single payer is good for you.

There is no free lunch here with single payer. there are always trade offs.
Click to expand...

Well sort of, but here's the rub. EAch province has supplemental programs for seniors and the poor that covers such things as drugs. Everyone gets baseline coverage, workers have supplemental insurance, both the poor and senior citizens have specific provincial supplemental programs.

i agree there are always trade-offs. One of the biggies in support of private profit healthcare is ridiculously inflated costs. one of ours is longer wait times. The variances in the outcomes of the two systems would suggest Americans' aren't getting value for all that money.
 
jaeger19 said:
No you didn't give me a peer reviewed paper "showing that single payer systems were superior to ours"..
Click to expand...
You are fully aware that I did. You’ve provided no evidence in rebuttal, which is why you remain refuted.
 
Jonsa said:
Well sort of, but here's the rub. EAch province has supplemental programs for seniors and the poor that covers such things as drugs. Everyone gets baseline coverage, workers have supplemental insurance, both the poor and senior citizens have specific provincial supplemental programs.

i agree there are always trade-offs. One of the biggies in support of private profit healthcare is ridiculously inflated costs. one of ours is longer wait times. The variances in the outcomes of the two systems would suggest Americans' aren't getting value for all that money.
Click to expand...

Actually it depends on what you value.. and what insurance you have. Most of americans would say that they value the effectiveness, timeliness and choice of the American system.. over the Canadian system that is if they have insurance.

And its also an interesting discussion when it comes to the cost of healthcare. Our doctors make more,, our nurses make more.. almost everything connected to the healthcare industry here.. makes more money than in Canada. Healthcare in this nation is one of the leading grower of jobs. Which.. comes at a time when we have baby boomers aging and needing care.. and now covid 19.

To cut our healthcare down to Canadian levels.. we would have to cut our GDP down by 6% or more. The great recession reduced GDP by only 4% or so.

There just is no getting around the fact that cutting healthcare spending in this country will have some very large negative effects on the economy. Its going to mean an acceleration of rural hospital closures.. , its going to mean fewer nurses, fewer doctors.. fewer good paying jobs... particularly in communities where the local hospital or hospitals are major employers.

There is no free lunch here.
 
rahl said:
You are fully aware that I did. You’ve provided no evidence in rebuttal, which is why you remain refuted.
Click to expand...

Yawn.. no you didn't and I explained in detail why you didn't..

Look.. the adults in the room are trying to have an actual debate.. so run along now.
 
jaeger19 said:
Actually it depends on what you value.. and what insurance you have. Most of americans would say that they value the effectiveness, timeliness and choice of the American system.. over the Canadian system that is if they have insurance.

And its also an interesting discussion when it comes to the cost of healthcare. Our doctors make more,, our nurses make more.. almost everything connected to the healthcare industry here.. makes more money than in Canada. Healthcare in this nation is one of the leading grower of jobs. Which.. comes at a time when we have baby boomers aging and needing care.. and now covid 19.

To cut our healthcare down to Canadian levels.. we would have to cut our GDP down by 6% or more. The great recession reduced GDP by only 4% or so.

There just is no getting around the fact that cutting healthcare spending in this country will have some very large negative effects on the economy. Its going to mean an acceleration of rural hospital closures.. , its going to mean fewer nurses, fewer doctors.. fewer good paying jobs... particularly in communities where the local hospital or hospitals are major employers.

There is no free lunch here.
Click to expand...


I agree its in what Americans consider value for money. They have no trouble in 40% more for healthcare per capita for faster service and poorer outcomes.

i don't understand you comment about cutting gdp.


Are you arguing that the runaway costs of healthcare services isn't going to be brought under control because its too big an economic driver?

TANSTAAFL.
 
jaeger19 said:
Yawn.. no you didn't and I explained in detail why you didn't..

Look.. the adults in the room are trying to have an actual debate.. so run along now.
Click to expand...
You are fully aware that I did. You’ve provided no evidence in rebuttal, which is why you remain refuted.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom