• 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!

US healthcare is a bad joke

FinnFox

FinnFox

DP Veteran
Joined
Apr 27, 2019
Messages
745
Reaction score
314
Location
Finland
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Progressive
Just watched this:



$500 / stitch is insane, :lol: Seriously, your system is laughable :lol:

and one quite new video about our healthcare system here in Finland:

 
FinnFox said:
Just watched this:



$500 / stitch is insane, :lol: Seriously, your system is laughable :lol:

and one quite new video about our healthcare system here in Finland:

Click to expand...


And just think if they didn't have us(Big Brother) that protects them and they really had to spend for a military?
 
Luther said:
And just think if they didn't have us(Big Brother) that protects them and they really had to spend for a military?
Click to expand...

Wtf does that have to do with healthcare costs? You're intentionally trying to distract with nonsensical information.

"What if they have less squirrels than us? Then their healthcare would be astronomically expensive and unaffordable for millions just like ours!"

We pay over double PER CAPITA what other nations pay yet we still are ranked low globally in quality of care, access to care, affordability, life expectancy, infant mortality rate, and every other metric. The US has the most rationed healthcare in the western world with literal death panels at insurance agencies deciding who dies and lives.
 
RabidAlpaca said:
Wtf does that have to do with healthcare costs? You're intentionally trying to distract with nonsensical information.

"What if they have less squirrels than us? Then their healthcare would be astronomically expensive and unaffordable for millions just like ours!"

We pay over double PER CAPITA what other nations pay yet we still are ranked low globally in quality of care, access to care, affordability, life expectancy, infant mortality rate, and every other metric. The US has the most rationed healthcare in the western world with literal death panels at insurance agencies deciding who dies and lives.
Click to expand...

Are they including what an insurance company makes in this cost?


Of course it will cost more?
 
Luther said:
Are they including what an insurance company makes in this cost?


Of course it will cost more?
Click to expand...

I don't understand your question or why you chose to ignore all of my post. ALL EXPENSES CONSIDERED Americans pay over double per capita what other nations pay to GET LESS. If you want to challenge that objective fact, use your words and make an argument instead of these lazy one liners.
 
RabidAlpaca said:
I don't understand your question or why you chose to ignore all of my post. ALL EXPENSES CONSIDERED Americans pay over double per capita what other nations pay to GET LESS. If you want to challenge that objective fact, use your words and make an argument instead of these lazy one liners.
Click to expand...

I don't understand your question
Click to expand...

I know(LOL)



Look, I, like you have a problem with our cost

Doesn't mean we need to turn it over to our VAIN FED GOV


Also, our Healthcare is actually better in many ways

We lead innovation for example
 
Luther said:
I know(LOL)



Look, I, like you have a problem with our cost

Doesn't mean we need to turn it over to our VAIN FED GOV


Also, our Healthcare is actually better in many ways

We lead innovation for example
Click to expand...

You've made it clear that you're only here to distract and obstruct any conversation of the facts. There are dozens and dozens of different healthcare models, many of which are free market and not managed by the government. You're willfully choosing to be ignorant of facts.
 
RabidAlpaca said:
You've made it clear that you're only here to distract and obstruct any conversation of the facts. There are dozens and dozens of different healthcare models, many of which are free market and not managed by the government. You're willfully choosing to be ignorant of facts.
Click to expand...

Alright then!

See ya!
 
I THINK what he is saying, is that due to those countries spending less on military, they can afford to spend more on healthcare. Which reduces INDIVIDUAL costs.

More over, they can reduce the cost of healthcare by reducing the overhead, by having free, or dramatically cheaper education, and reduced R and D, since the US is responsible for most innovations.

Not saying our system is perfect, or even ideal. Its FUBAR. But we will not be able to imitate their systems.
 
KevinKohler said:
I THINK what he is saying, is that due to those countries spending less on military, they can afford to spend more on healthcare. Which reduces INDIVIDUAL costs.

More over, they can reduce the cost of healthcare by reducing the overhead, by having free, or dramatically cheaper education, and reduced R and D, since the US is responsible for most innovations.

Not saying our system is perfect, or even ideal. Its FUBAR. But we will not be able to imitate their systems.
Click to expand...

Except they don't spend more on Healthcare, THEY SPEND LESS. Why is it the go-to argument for conservatives is that every other Healthcare system must be secretly more expensive than ours, it's just the big subsidies that make it affordable! All costs, including individual rates and subsidies equal a sum LESS than half of what we pay.

It was a stupid argument on his part and you shouldn't jump on board. I think it's sad that you think so incredibly little of America and Americans that you think we could never do what dozens of other countries have successfully done.
 
The basic concept of universal (publicly funded) medical care (or anything else, for that matter) is that everyone will get the same level of goods/services but only those who make "too much" must pay the taxation required for the government to fund those goods/services. Obviously, having such a system means that one's income level determines their cost of medical care but has no bearing on the level of (subsidized) medical care that they will receive.

As noted in the (first OP) video, UHC does not mean that there will be no additiponal out-of-pocket costs - co-pays (user fees?) may still be required either as a fixed amount or as a percentage of the cost of goods/services received. Having UHC also does not mean that everyone gets equal priority for receiving any publicly funded medical treatment - some may have to wait until (all?) others deemed to be in more urgent need of medical attention have been taken care of.
 
ttwtt78640 said:
The basic concept of universal (publicly funded) medical care (or anything else, for that matter) is that everyone will get the same level of goods/services but only those who make "too much" must pay the taxation required for the government to fund those goods/services. Obviously, having such a system means that one's income level determines their cost of medical care but has no bearing on the level of (subsidized) medical care that they will receive.

As noted in the (first OP) video, UHC does not mean that there will be no additiponal out-of-pocket costs - co-pays (user fees?) may still be required either as a fixed amount or as a percentage of the cost of goods/services received. Having UHC also does not mean that everyone gets equal priority for receiving any publicly funded medical treatment - some may have to wait until (all?) others deemed to be in more urgent need of medical attention have been taken care of.
Click to expand...

That is incorrect. In most UHC countries EVERYBODY contributes, not just the rich. In Germany, for instance, it's 7% of your income, no matter what you make. You can also choose your doctor, health insurer or even decide to pull out of the public system altogether and go private with your money. There are dozens of flavors and ways we could do this.

Also as far as prioritization goes, the US currently has a system where wealth is what prioritizes care instead of need. Further, unless you're massively wealthy, whether you can get treatment or not is decided by analysts at a private insurance company. In UHC countries the only person deciding if you get a procedure or not and with what priority is you and the doctor you freely chose for yourself.
 
KevinKohler said:
I THINK what he is saying, is that due to those countries spending less on military, they can afford to spend more on healthcare. Which reduces INDIVIDUAL costs.

More over, they can reduce the cost of healthcare by reducing the overhead, by having free, or dramatically cheaper education, and reduced R and D, since the US is responsible for most innovations.

Not saying our system is perfect, or even ideal. Its FUBAR. But we will not be able to imitate their systems.
Click to expand...

That (bolded above) is not the case - total medical care costs (expressed either as a per capita expenditure or as a percentage of GDP) are reduced by having a single-payer system instead of having a mixture of public/private multiple payer systems.

Whether or not the US can adopt an "imitation" of such a system depends largely on how the reduction in total spending is achieved. Do we cut the 'overhead' of R&D along with any chance of medical care providers making a profit? Do we pay medical care providers for the cost of services offered (like we do with police/fire departments which get a fixed annual budget) or only based on actual demand (services rendered to patients on that day, month or year)?
 
RabidAlpaca said:
That is incorrect. In most UHC countries EVERYBODY contributes, not just the rich. In Germany, for instance, it's 7% of your income, no matter what you make. You can also choose your doctor, health insurer or even decide to pull out of the public system altogether and go private with your money. There are dozens of flavors and ways we could do this.

Also as far as prioritization goes, the US currently has a system where wealth is what prioritizes care instead of need. Further, unless you're massively wealthy, whether you can get treatment or not is decided by analysts at a private insurance company. In UHC countries the only person deciding if you get a procedure or not and with what priority is you and the doctor you freely chose for yourself.
Click to expand...

That (bolded above) does not seem to be consistent with our current M4A bills. These M4A bills heavily depend on taxing "the rich" more, eliminating any 'private' medical care insurance and eliminating for-profit medical care providers.

Summary of H.R. 676 (113th): Expanded & Improved Medicare For All Act - GovTrack.us

Text - S.1804 - 115th Congress (2017-2018): Medicare for All Act of 2017 | Congress.gov | Library of Congress
 
ttwtt78640 said:
That (bolded above) does not seem to be consistent with our current M4A bills. These M4A bills heavily depend on taxing "the rich" more, eliminating any 'private' medical care insurance and eliminating for-profit medical care providers.

Summary of H.R. 676 (113th): Expanded & Improved Medicare For All Act - GovTrack.us

Text - S.1804 - 115th Congress (2017-2018): Medicare for All Act of 2017 | Congress.gov | Library of Congress
Click to expand...

So when talking about UHC systems you said it couldn't work because of a policy that really only the US does? Cool. I'm not saying any specific M4A bill is the answer, I'm saying we could effectively implement UHC without the issues you mentioned if we wanted to, but Americans for some reason just do not want high quality affordable health care.

What's wrong with the German model of flat 7% across the board? Many countries have dual public and private systems so consumers can choose. Why can't we do that?
 
Last edited:
RabidAlpaca said:
So when talking about UHC systems you said it couldn't work because of a policy that really only the US does? Cool. I'm not saying any specific M4A bill is the answer, I'm saying we could effectively implement UHC without the issues you mentioned if we wanted to, but Americans for some reason just do not want high quality affordable health care.

What's wrong with the German model of flat 7% across the board? Many countries have dual public and private systems so consumers can choose. Why can't we do that?
Click to expand...

I agree with you that other nations (or states within them, such as in Canada) have come up with viable systems that put our current mess to shame. The primary reason that "we can't do that" is that no such bill exists at the federal, state or local level. One of the reasons for that is PPACA outlaws states from deviating from the "one size fits all" mandate for what a "federally approved" medical care insurance policy can be.
 
FinnFox said:
Just watched this:



$500 / stitch is insane, :lol: Seriously, your system is laughable :lol:

and one quite new video about our healthcare system here in Finland:

Click to expand...


i paid two grand out of pocket for the hospital to superglue a deep cut on my thumb and to give me a tetanus shot. took them 45 minutes, and 30 of that was my wait time. this is with decent insurance. luckily, i think that my current insurance is better, but i have personally avoided hospital treatment at all costs since then. there were probably two other times since then that i should have gone and didn't.
 
The primary reason America won't ever have a public health care system is because

Republicans protect the profits of the insurance companies, big pharma and the rest of the health care system

Republicans rich donors can afford the best health care no matter the cost and don't want to contribute to health care for the rest of us

Republican propaganda is very effective and has convinced a large segment of the population that what works in the rest of the developed world will not work in America. The middle/working class suffers because they don't want poor people to have access to that health care. It would be humorous if it weren't so tragic.
 
Luther said:
I know(LOL)



Look, I, like you have a problem with our cost

Doesn't mean we need to turn it over to our VAIN FED GOV


Also, our Healthcare is actually better in many ways

We lead innovation for example
Click to expand...

Innovation people pay out the ying yang for. I honestly don't understand why the right keeps supporting our out of control health care system. It's broken and we all know it and yet all I hear from the right are excuses as to why we can't fix it.
 
FinnFox said:
$500 / stitch is insane, :lol: Seriously, your system is laughable :lol:
Click to expand...

There's a limit to how useful these attempts at international comparison are.

At first glance, it's impressive how little the U.K. spends on its NHS. On the other hand, the NHS is reaching a crisis point due to chronic underfunding. You could always spend less if you decided to prioritize savings over services, but there's a very strong bias against that in the United States.
 
Greenbeard said:
There's a limit to how useful these attempts at international comparison are.

At first glance, it's impressive how little the U.K. spends on its NHS. On the other hand, the NHS is reaching a crisis point due to chronic underfunding. You could always spend less if you decided to prioritize savings over services, but there's a very strong bias against that in the United States.
Click to expand...

Well for most.of.America we.are.reaching a crisis point due to spiraling cost. Insurance premiums without the employer paying them are just out of reach.

Suprises me that they say only 14% of Adult Americans don't have health insurance. I am not sure where that number.comes from but i bet the real number is higher.
 
rickc said:
Well for most.of.America we.are.reaching a crisis point due to spiraling cost. Insurance premiums without the employer paying them are just out of reach.
Click to expand...

Any idea when it's unbearable? (criterion for that are like...?)

If people already know it's getting more expensive and income is most likely (for so many) low, so you can't pay as much as it's needed for proper healthcare... how long people are willing to continue and going along this path?

Take the streets, make some noise and shake things as long as needed.
 
FinnFox said:
Just watched this:



$500 / stitch is insane, :lol: Seriously, your system is laughable :lol:

and one quite new video about our healthcare system here in Finland:

Click to expand...



1. Finland is Finland.

2. The United States is the United States.

3. The thread title calls American health care a "bad joke."

4. Finland is a small country with a small population that is culturally homogeneous.

5. The United States is a huge country with a large population that is NOT culturally homogeneous.

6. For the people who have good insurance, American healthcare is not a "bad joke." It is probably as good or better than that in any other country.

7. For people who do not have good insurance, American healthcare is not so good.


8. Because the majority of our "leaders" in Congress are petty and selfish and incompetent, there is no way to get good healthcare for everyone in this country.

9. So the costs will continue to mount, many people will continue to suffer because of mediocre healthcare, and some people (insurance companies, etc.) will continue to make a lot of money.

10. Nothing will change until we have adults in the White House and the Congress. Not the circus clowns that currently control this country.
 
Last edited:
TheParser said:
1. Finland is Finland.

2. The United States is the United States.

3. The thread title calls American health care a "bad joke."

4. Finland is a small country with a small population that is culturally homogeneous.

5. The United States is a huge country with a large population that is NOT culturally homogeneous.

6. For the people who have good insurance, American healthcare is not a "bad joke." It is probably as good or better than that in any other country.

7. For people who do not have good insurance, American healthcare is not so good.


8. Because the majority of our "leaders" in Congress are petty and selfish and incompetent, there is no way to get good healthcare for everyone in this country.

9. So the costs will continue to mount, many people will continue to suffer because of mediocre healthcare, and some people (insurance companies, etc.) will continue to make a lot of money.

10. Nothing will change until we have adults in the White House and the Congress. Not the circus clowns that currently control this country.
Click to expand...

Seems like you and the OP and most others in this thread need to take care to not conflate health care with health insurance.

Care quality is care quality. Care cost is care cost. Population health is population health. Expensive care doesn't mean its quality is bad. Poor population health (relative to certain others) also does not necessarily mean quality is bad.
 
I wouldn't say its laughable, it is an outrage. Like with most things in this country, the people are being robbed by the rich and not only are we alllowing it, half the country cheers on this theft
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom