Health care

[detbuch]

Originally Posted by wdmso

Why should everyone get the same health care? because money should not influence your care or status or skin color( has a lot to do with your income) but seem you have no issue with that

Get over it. Money does influence. That's why people strive to get it. The notion that money should not influence something overlooks the intrinsic meaning of money. Money is a medium of EXCHANGE. And it represents the labor or product of those who own money (or inherit it). In a free society, exchange is voluntary. Healthcare involves an exchange between buyer and seller. If a buyer can demand the same product from a seller for less money than others are willing or able to pay, the exchange is not voluntary. It is coerced. And if government can force sellers in a given exchange to trade their product for less return than they can get from other buyers, than it can do so in all exchanges. And if government can take ownership of all exchanges, determining which can exist, in what manner they exist, and "pay" for all exchanges equally for all buyers regardless what those buyers have to offer for the product, then there is really no exchange. The government, in effect, owns the product and the labor to produce it, and likewise owns the health of those needing the product. It all becomes a process of people filling the slots in the scheme that government masterminds devise, "benevolently" seeing to it that those filling the slots stay healthy enough to continue doing so.

I see that you didn't answer (among other things) my question "And if the government can mandate that everyone must have the same health care, why can't it mandate that everyone must buy the same car? And why can't the government be the single payer for all those same cars?"

So, yeah, there is a reason for money, or some facsimile. It makes it more efficient to make trades. It expands the size and efficiency of a market. It, or what it represents, is an intrinsic part of a marketplace. Removing it or what it represents from the market, eliminates the market.

A bureaucratically planned and enforced society has no need of a market. A market is the enemy of planned, controlled, societies. And vice versa.

How is that even possible? your confusing availability with out come 2 different issues Some doctors are better than others. its about getting care but again the logic more money paid equals better doctors rather than overall availably to care

In the case of better doctors, the outcome is what is available. There is no confusion between outcome and availability there. What you're confusing is that availability to health care gives all the availability to the same healthcare. That is not possible. Some will get better, some not as good, doctors, so it is not possible under single payer system for all to choose the best. So everybody will not get the same healthcare. Nor will the same healthcare even be available to everybody. Even having the chance at the best healthcare, other than luck, is to have more to offer for it.

Even in single government payer systems there is discrimination and rationing and choices of who gets care instead of others. And some get it sooner than others. And some die waiting.

this is a completely made up ^^^^^^ so this happens on Medicaid NO!

It happens in totally single payer systems . . . such as the UK which you mentioned. We have not yet achieved such a system in our country. We're on the cusp of that happening. If and when it does, it will be happening here.

It happens now in the current system.. die cuz you cant afford the Best doctors and care or lose your house or go on welfare or MA Health not because your a slug you have no choice

That's the reason for sustaining a free market. It creates the possibility for getting better results for yourself if you strive for the means to do so. And that striving, by the way, is what creates bigger markets which create more technology and means to provide better results. Take away the striving and the market shrinks. Availability for better stuff diminishes. The trajectory toward controlled societies increases. Freedom is lost. But the poor will be taken care of by government edict, and there will be more levelling of society into an overall poorness living under the deception of a minimized state of hog heaven.

this OMG single payer result in Government run hospitals like in Venezuela is a honed fear tactic of the right that the boogie mans coming blaming Liberals ideas for everything even as we hear daily how many seats they own in states and in DC and Governorships

its amazing how that works

By all means, let us keep chipping away at the benefits of a free marketplace. Let us keep squeezing the life out of it.

Venezuela! Pfft! Nothing there to see. Cuba is the paradise which we keep missing to notice as such. China and Russia trying to move toward capitalism in order to sustain their economies--just a little tick, a little glitch on the road to the final equal, fair, and politically righteous societies controlled by government edict.

[JohnR]

So I should work 60 hours a week to pay for my Buick health care plan (can't afford the Cadillac plan) AND contribute to someone else's Buick health care plan?

I contribute both with my plan (that also pays into Hospitals that assist the uninsured) and with my taxes that are "redistributed" for me.

The money should have no issue re quality of health care is wrong and frankly unicornrubyslipper talk. Money HAS to be taken into account. Otherwise people will continue to take money out of other people's piles. And more and more and take money from our kids and your kids futures as debt. That should be unacceptable. It is not a bottomless pit.

Should there be more inexpensive ways to distribute health care? More clinics? More community center based medicine? What responsibility lies with those that are receiving this no cost / low cost health care (let alone the full plans)?


FTR - I am for some type of AFFORDABLE care for those that cant afford it and those that are taxed for it - but this is not affordable nor sustainable.

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by JohnR

So I should work 60 hours a week to pay for my Buick health care plan (can't afford the Cadillac plan) AND contribute to someone else's Buick health care plan?

I contribute both with my plan (that also pays into Hospitals that assist the uninsured) and with my taxes that are "redistributed" for me.

The money should have no issue re quality of health care is wrong and frankly unicornrubyslipper talk. Money HAS to be taken into account. Otherwise people will continue to take money out of other people's piles. And more and more and take money from our kids and your kids futures as debt. That should be unacceptable. It is not a bottomless pit.

Should there be more inexpensive ways to distribute health care? More clinics? More community center based medicine? What responsibility lies with those that are receiving this no cost / low cost health care (let alone the full plans)?


FTR - I am for some type of AFFORDABLE care for those that cant afford it and those that are taxed for it - but this is not affordable nor sustainable.

Great last line. There should be some quasi public plan for those that can't afford to get it in the private sector, and I have absolutely zero issue with paying taxes to support such a plan...heck, that's one of the things I WANT to pay taxes for. And we have that today with Medicaid. We just need to try to improve it, but don't ask me how. I know fraud and waste drive up costs, let's start there and see how much it saves.

I also don't think people should pay for pre-existing conditions (and I don't have any, not advocating for my own wealth). We don't get to choose whether or not we are born healthy, and those that are unlucky enough to be born with issues, should not endure a lifelong struggle to pay for them. Just my $0.02.

[wdmso]

Originally Posted by JohnR

So I should work 60 hours a week to pay for my Buick health care plan (can't afford the Cadillac plan) AND contribute to someone else's Buick health care plan?

I contribute both with my plan (that also pays into Hospitals that assist the uninsured) and with my taxes that are "redistributed" for me.

The money should have no issue re quality of health care is wrong and frankly unicornrubyslipper talk. Money HAS to be taken into account. Otherwise people will continue to take money out of other people's piles. And more and more and take money from our kids and your kids futures as debt. That should be unacceptable. It is not a bottomless pit.

Should there be more inexpensive ways to distribute health care? More clinics? More community center based medicine? What responsibility lies with those that are receiving this no cost / low cost health care (let alone the full plans)?


FTR - I am for some type of AFFORDABLE care for those that cant afford it and those that are taxed for it - but this is not affordable nor sustainable.

John affordable heath car is not possible its lost ..These company's Love money they will never roll back prices .. not different then the airlines charging for baggage extra leg room even picking a seat . or a Hotel that charges you to park or charges you a resort fee cuz they have a pool once they knew they could charge it and get paid they all do it ... there all in on it its baked into the cake

Maybe the government should stop spending $100 million per F35 fighter "redistributed" some of the 57% of our national defense Budget and send a little to health care which is only 5% .... of the Budget

[JohnR]

Originally Posted by wdmso

Maybe the government should stop spending $100 million per F35 fighter "redistributed" some of the 57% of our national defense Budget and send a little to health care which is only 5% .... of the Budget

Sadly it is more like 140 million a pop on F35 (more actually as that number does not included engines). I could find plenty of waste in procurement and more than happy top debate the ills of defense procurement and Beltway Bandits.

But you do not underscore your seriousness on math or debate when you put out numbers like that : "57% of our national defense Budget and send a little to health care which is only 5% ". Those numbers are false, and at best highly misleading. The only time numbers are close to yours is when you are parsing discretionary spending. See image 1 below from CBO. This has Defense around 45% of discretionary spending and health around 23% (combined national health and Veteran/VA spending). But those numbers don't include most of Healthcare which is Medicare and Medicaid If you look at total budget (3.9 Trillion) then defense is down around 15% and health including Medicare / Medicaid are around 28%.

So argue your point but establish a consistent baseline for your numbers: You can't use gross numbers in one pie and compare to net numbers in the other pie

[wdmso]

Originally Posted by detbuch

By all means, let us keep chipping away at the benefits of a free marketplace. Let us keep squeezing the life out of it.

Venezuela! Pfft! Nothing there to see. Cuba is the paradise which we keep missing to notice as such. China and Russia trying to move toward capitalism in order to sustain their economies--just a little tick, a little glitch on the road to the final equal, fair, and politically righteous societies controlled by government edict.

A Free market and for profit model hospital's are why health care is where it is today not obama care ... a free market wont fix a problem created by a free market system Heath care isn't a product... it was turned into 1

look at Oklahoma... Free market limited regulations has given them earthquakes their 2nd in the country

[scottw]

Originally Posted by wdmso

Heath care isn't a product... it was turned into 1

it's a service...you have to pay for those too..