• 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!

This Is Medicare For All

Moderate Right said:
I think I lost you. Are you saying that we should get rid of private insurance and force providers to accept a government plan where they lose money with every patient?
Click to expand...

Nope, I'm simply pointing out the those who now pay for their medical care (reagrdless of the means) are also paying for subsidizing those who do not pay for their medical care. Obviously, nobody (regardless of whether they are a non-profit) can remain opperating if they lose money with every patient.
 
Helix said:
A single payer system that covers everyone will address a lot of problems that a partial system doesn't. Basically, it will work here like it works everywhere else. We just have to vote out a lot of naysayers before it can happen. I'll do my part to help with that.
Click to expand...

That (bolded above) is true only if that system is run exactly like it is "everywhere else". Can you tell us which specific UHC system "used by everyone else" that the US should adopt?
 
ttwtt78640 said:
That (bolded above) is true only if that system is run exactly like it is "everywhere else". Can you tell us which specific UHC system "used by everyone else" that the US should adopt?
Click to expand...

I think that we should take the best parts of several systems and custom fit a solution. If the system is continuously sabotaged by Republicans like the ACA was, however, it might not work as well as it does elsewhere.
 
Helix said:
I think that we should take the best parts of several systems and custom fit a solution. If the system is continuously sabotaged by Republicans like the ACA was, however, it might not work as well as it does elsewhere.
Click to expand...

That was an excellent dodge - you should run for office. ;)

Much like saying "I a firm supporter of X and, once elected, I'll tell you exactly what X turns out to be".
 
ttwtt78640 said:
That (bolded above) is true only if that system is run exactly like it is "everywhere else". Can you tell us which specific UHC system "used by everyone else" that the US should adopt?
Click to expand...

Germany has a good model but I would prefer Canada's
 
ttwtt78640 said:
That was an excellent dodge - you should run for office. ;)

Much like saying "I a firm supporter of X and, once elected, I'll tell you exactly what X turns out to be".
Click to expand...

I think that we should custom fit a solution. If that's not a good enough answer for you, even adopting a single payer system from Canada or another first world nation would be better than what we have now.
 
ttwtt78640 said:
Even if you are able to afford your Medicare (for some) premiums, which consume about 17% of my girlfriend's Social Security income, does not mean that you will have no additional out-of-pocket medical care costs.
Click to expand...

Soooo, we should....
 
There's been surveys have shown that Republicans like ACA but don't like Obamacare. So I guess the key thing here is if we want everybody to work together on a new health care plan is just don't name a new law after a Democrat, especially a black guy.
 
Helix said:
I think that we should custom fit a solution. If that's not a good enough answer for you, even adopting a single payer system from Canada or another first world nation would be better than what we have now.
Click to expand...

Diving into the great unknown (just trust some future congress to "figure out the details") is definitely not anything that I support. Now you are back to praising several different knowns and you still won't commit to making a choice among them.
 
ttwtt78640 said:
Diving into the great unknown (just trust some future congress to "figure out the details") is definitely not anything that I support. Now you are back to praising several different knowns and you still won't commit to making a choice among them.
Click to expand...

I've been pretty clear about what I support.
 
Nickyjo said:
Soooo, we should....
Click to expand...

Stop pretending that government supplied (or subsidized) insurance is "affordable". The current "choice" of Medicare part B is take it and pay the fixed monthly premiums or forfeit your Social Security retirement benefits.
 
ttwtt78640 said:
Hmm... is that your rather odd way of saying that you do not support M4A?
Click to expand...

Oh I support it. And it will change when it gets to Congress as it should.


That is government
 
Helix said:
A single payer system that covers everyone will address a lot of problems that a partial system doesn't. Basically, it will work here like it works everywhere else. We just have to vote out a lot of naysayers before it can happen. I'll do my part to help with that.
Click to expand...

This is what you guys want - MFA and it caused these people to do this because they were so deep in debt with medical bills. This is what you want for the entire country.
 
Moderate Right said:
This is what you guys want - MFA and it caused these people to do this because they were so deep in debt with medical bills. This is what you want for the entire country.
Click to expand...

Yeah it will be great
 
ttwtt78640 said:
Nope, I'm simply pointing out the those who now pay for their medical care (reagrdless of the means) are also paying for subsidizing those who do not pay for their medical care. Obviously, nobody (regardless of whether they are a non-profit) can remain opperating if they lose money with every patient.
Click to expand...

Which is really what the left want. They want the better off to provide free medical care to the poorer, which is exactly what is happening. So, I don't really know what they are complaining about.
 
Moderate Right said:
Elderly couple found dead from murder-suicide after they couldn’t afford wife’s healthcare: ‘We will be in the front bedroom’


I thought Medicare for all was supposed to be the answer. Apparently it isn't all it is cracked up to be.
Click to expand...

It's not a complete solution, there are many problems that face the healthcare industry and have inflated prices. It's not to say that some form of universal healthcare is completely out or cannot be beneficial overall. It can, most of the advanced Western Nations have some form of universal healthcare with better access to and lower costs for healthcare than the US currently has. Also, not all forms of universal healthcare are single payer as something like Medicare for All would be.

Currently one of the largest drivers of bankruptcy is medical costs, so we obviously have some troubles with that. America pays more and has less access to healthcare than other modern Western nations. I think that those that are spouting Medicare for All are a bit naive in that call given the complexities of the system. But it doesn't mean that universal healthcare cannot be beneficial overall nor that we cannot also strive to fix some of the fundamental issues with our healthcare system.
 
Moderate Right said:
Which is really what the left want. They want the better off to provide free medical care to the poorer, which is exactly what is happening. So, I don't really know what they are complaining about.
Click to expand...

They want complete federal government control over the US medical care industry (aka Socialism) and, as of yet, lack that power.
 
ttwtt78640 said:
They want complete federal government control over the US medical care industry (aka Socialism) and, as of yet, lack that power.
Click to expand...

I'm having trouble following your opinions here..

Earlier you pointed out that now if uninsured people go to the hospital or doctor the taxpayers and people with insurance pay for the uninsured. You seemed like you wanted a better system then that...

But when other ideas are being offered here you are using the 'it's evil socialism' talking point...What we have now is socialism. Taxpayers and insured people paying for the uninsured is socialism.

Am I missing your point?
 
SenorXm/Sirius said:
I'm having trouble following your opinions here..

Earlier you pointed out that now if uninsured people go to the hospital or doctor the taxpayers and people with insurance pay for the uninsured. You seemed like you wanted a better system then that...

But when other ideas are being offered here you are using the 'it's evil socialism' talking point...What we have now is socialism. Taxpayers and insured people paying for the uninsured is socialism.

Am I missing your point?
Click to expand...

The point is that is happening without total federal government control - why do we need total federal government control of 18% of GDP to get what (you say?) we have now? What I am missing is the urgent reason (excuse?) for demanding M4A?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom