~ Why I Like Single Payer Healthcare for the United States of America ~

[Bill Wiltrack]

.






.............................................................







Preventive healthcare expenditures can save several hundreds of billions of dollars per year because publicly funded universal healthcare would benefit employers and consumers, that employers would benefit from a bigger pool of potential customers and that employers would likely pay less, would be spared administrative costs, and inequities between employers would be reduced.


Single payer could benefit from a more fluid economy with increasing economic growth, aggregate demand, corporate profit, and quality of life.


Cancer patients are more likely to be diagnosed at Stage I where curative treatment is typically a few outpatient visits, instead of at Stage III or later in an emergency room where treatment can involve years of hospitalization and is often terminal.


Others have estimated a long-term savings amounting to 40% of all national health expenditures due to preventive health care, although estimates from the Congressional Budget Office and The New England Journal of Medicine have found that preventive care is more expensive due to increased utilization.


Any national system would be paid for in part through taxes replacing insurance premiums, savings would be realized through preventive care and the elimination of insurance company overhead and hospital billing costs.


An analysis of a single-payer bill by Physicians for a National Health Program estimated the immediate savings at $350 billion per year.



The Commonwealth Fund believes that, if the United States adopted a universal health care system, the mortality rate would improve and the country would save approximately $570 billion a year.







.

[Harbal]

And we should be interested in this because.........?

[Hobbes' Choice]

.


The Commonwealth Fund believes that, if the United States adopted a universal health care system, the mortality rate would improve and the country would save approximately $570 billion a year. [/size]



.

Okay Billy Boy - say in your own words what you think "Single Payer Health Care" look like and how it differs from what you have now, and what is available elsewhere, then I'll tell you why, because you live in the USA it is NEVER going to happen.

[Bill Wiltrack]

.




Single Payer Healthcare for America would go a looooong way in removing PROFIT from our healthcare system and would assist in eliminating much of the, paperwork & time constraints that we now enjoy.

*PLUS - I think we would receive better overall healthcare based upon what I stated above.


So there!





.

[Trajk Logik]

If profit is removed from the system, then what would incentivize doctors to be better? One doctor won't have the same success rate as another doctor, so why would the better doctor get paid the same amount for the same service as the poor doctor?

My wife is a school teacher and her choice of health insurance provided by the govt. has diminished while getting more expensive (higher deductibles and higher premiums) since the passing of Obamacare.

I understand the downside of privatizing certain sectors, but there are several downsides to publicly funding these sectors as well. Most of the public sector isn't held accountable for mishaps. You get into the public sector not by what you know, but by who you know, and your job is then protected by tenure. This inevitably leads to the system being run by mediocrity. Just look at our own government and you can see what I mean.

I can probably agree with you that insurance companies shouldn't be making a profit, but then what about the doctors, who provide a service, and not every doctor's skill is the same. Poor doctors will be retained simply because there aren't enough good doctors to take care of everyone. As a patient, I'm sure you will try to find the best doctors and will then have to wait in long lines for the service because everyone else is looking for the best doctors too.

[henry quirk]

Before the ACA, I had a nice litte 'catastrophe' policy...wasn't meant for flu shots or colds or eye wear or any other small stuff...was meant for broken bones, cancers, etc.

As a self-employer I thought myself fortunate to find such a policy...it was relatively inexpensive and covered just what I needed covered.

With the ACA, my little policy was deemed 'substandard' and cancelled.

I was offered replacement policies, each offering a whole whack of services I don't want or need, and each way more expensive than what I could and can afford. I was told I could get a subsidy to make up the difference.

So, tell me how America's first steps into universal healthcare have helped me?

I had the coverage I needed, at a price I could afford...now, I can't afford coverage unless I become parasitical and use taxpayer dollars.

How is moving me from self-sufficency to dependent in my, or any one's, best interest?

Best I can tell: single payer -- for all the savings and whatnot -- mainly just binds folks together in unnatural ways, and gives some one else a big, unwelcome, say in my affairs.

Hobbes sez it won't happen...I say it will and soon, and it won't be a good thing for folks like me

[Bill Wiltrack]

.





There is this little thingy called, The Hippocratic Oath.


Believe it or not, people used to help people for the sake of helping people; To relieve suffering in mankind.



If your wife is a public school teacher she is insured through a for-profit group insurer.


Are you saying that if there is a single-payer health program provided by the state there will be no standard & practice guidelines?


Are you stating that someone would make the effort to attend 6 to 10 more years of college level study to become a competent doctor and then not give a shit when they become a resident?





.

[henry quirk]

I swear to fulfill, to the best of my ability and judgment, this covenant:

I will respect the hard-won scientific gains of those physicians in whose steps I walk, and gladly share such knowledge as is mine with those who are to follow.

I will apply, for the benefit of the sick, all measures which are required, avoiding those twin traps of overtreatment and therapeutic nihilism.

I will remember that there is art to medicine as well as science, and that warmth, sympathy, and understanding may outweigh the surgeon's knife or the chemist's drug.

I will not be ashamed to say "I know not," nor will I fail to call in my colleagues when the skills of another are needed for a patient's recovery.

I will respect the privacy of my patients, for their problems are not disclosed to me that the world may know. Most especially must I tread with care in matters of life and death. If it is given me to save a life, all thanks. But it may also be within my power to take a life; this awesome responsibility must be faced with great humbleness and awareness of my own frailty. Above all, I must not play at God.

I will remember that I do not treat a fever chart, a cancerous growth, but a sick human being, whose illness may affect the person's family and economic stability. My responsibility includes these related problems, if I am to care adequately for the sick.

I will prevent disease whenever I can, for prevention is preferable to cure.

I will remember that I remain a member of society, with special obligations to all my fellow human beings, those sound of mind and body as well as the infirm.

If I do not violate this oath, may I enjoy life and art, respected while I live and remembered with affection thereafter. May I always act so as to preserve the finest traditions of my calling and may I long experience the joy of healing those who seek my help.

Written in 1964 by Louis Lasagna, Academic Dean of the School of Medicine at Tufts University, and used in many medical schools today.

-----

Not seein' diddly squat in there about technocrats determiming treatment, about boards denying treatment, about a doctor denying himself (profit, for example). Seems to me: it's all about the doctor and the patient and every one else can take a flyin' leap.

[Bill Wiltrack]

.






.........................................Thank you for the support & the cross reference!






.

[henry quirk]

Yer a 'funny' guy, Bill.

[Hobbes' Choice]

If profit is removed from the system, then what would incentivize doctors to be better?.

It has worked in the world long before money was invented.
IN the UK each doctor gets paid.
People pay in what they can, and get out of it what they need.
This has given us the world's most value for money health care system which neglects no one.

Maybe you should have some imagination?

What incentive do you need to do good. All decent people need none. It's only arseholes that stand there with their hands out waiting for payment before they roll their sleeves up.

[Trajk Logik]

If profit is removed from the system, then what would incentivize doctors to be better?.

It has worked in the world long before money was invented.
IN the UK each doctor gets paid.
People pay in what they can, and get out of it what they need.
This has given us the world's most value for money health care system which neglects no one.

Maybe you should have some imagination?

What incentive do you need to do good. All decent people need none. It's only arseholes that stand there with their hands out waiting for payment before they roll their sleeves up.

Someone is living in an imaginary world where people do things without ever expecting a "Thank You", or some kind of acknowledgement that their energy wasn't wasted in helping someone else.

Why do we even say, "please" and "thank you"? What exactly is appreciation? Why are you more willing to do something for someone if they express gratitude for your help as opposed to someone who doesn't?

Isn't appreciation a way of showing that you can return favors done for you at some future date? Isn't every act you perform one in which you wish to maintain your social connections and relationships? In other words, every "social" act is a selfish act - one made in an effort to reinforce our connections to others for our own benefit - because we are social creatures and find happiness in being with and relating to others.

Societies are built on the idea of "I scratch your back and you scratch mine." There can't be any successful social system that gives away resources to individuals who aren't willing to give back in some way.

Competition has worked long before humans even came on the scene. As a matter of fact, humans evolved and became successful through competing for resources with other homo species. Competition has always been the catalyst for innovation. In this sense, the free market - free from government intervention and monopolies - is the most progressive economic system as it promotes innovation. Socialism kills innovation and incentive. Socialism will need to control the population to the point of breeding humans and raising them by the state in order to achieve equal outcomes for all.

[Hobbes' Choice]

If profit is removed from the system, then what would incentivize doctors to be better?.

It has worked in the world long before money was invented.
IN the UK each doctor gets paid.
People pay in what they can, and get out of it what they need.
This has given us the world's most value for money health care system which neglects no one.

Maybe you should have some imagination?

What incentive do you need to do good. All decent people need none. It's only arseholes that stand there with their hands out waiting for payment before they roll their sleeves up.

Someone is living in an imaginary world where people do things without ever expecting a "Thank You", or some kind of acknowledgement that their energy wasn't wasted in helping someone else.
.

Yeah but you are one of the arseholes I was talking about.
You live for yourself and you will die lonely and desperate.
Now crawl back under you rock from whence you came!

[Trajk Logik]

It has worked in the world long before money was invented.
IN the UK each doctor gets paid.
People pay in what they can, and get out of it what they need.
This has given us the world's most value for money health care system which neglects no one.

Maybe you should have some imagination?

What incentive do you need to do good. All decent people need none. It's only arseholes that stand there with their hands out waiting for payment before they roll their sleeves up.

Someone is living in an imaginary world where people do things without ever expecting a "Thank You", or some kind of acknowledgement that their energy wasn't wasted in helping someone else.
.

Yeah but you are one of the arseholes I was talking about.
You live for yourself and you will die lonely and desperate.
Now crawl back under you rock from whence you came!

I do live for myself. How can I live for anyone else if I don't think about myself first? I'm married and been married for over 20 years, and have never been divorced, have 3 kids that are all honor roll students, worked at the same place for 20 years, and have clients that I've been servicing for that long. Can you say the same? If not, then maybe it is you that has the wrong outlook on life and the root of what makes relationships work.

You are the one resorting to name-calling and character assassination when you can't make a logical argument. It seems that you are the one in dire need of social skills. Start by reading Richard Dawkin's, "The Selfish Gene", and then do some research in psychology, sociology and evolutionary psychology.

[Trajk Logik]

.

If your wife is a public school teacher she is insured through a for-profit group insurer.

Not necessarily. Obamacare has a provision that limits an insurance company's profits - forcing them to payback money to their customers if their income exceeds a certain limit over the costs of running the company, yet costs keep going up - even with more people buying it. This is what happens when you pass a bill without reading it or knowing what is in it.

The public school system is a great example of the problems inherent in a public system as opposed to a private system. I see all the time where lame teachers and administrators keep their jobs based on tenure. One of her former principals went on vacation during FCAT testing and left all the work to her AP. She was about to retire and didn't care about what happened. When you know that you can never get fired unless you do something egregious, like abusing a child, then you become lazy in your job. And you advance in the public sector not based on what you know, but who you know. This is why the public sector will always be run by mediocrity. We are ruled by mediocrity.

Now I can't make this a blanket statement for all teachers and admins, as my own wife cares deeply about the kids she has in her class. So, yes, there are a few that actually care and became a teacher (or a doctor) for the right reasons, but they are a small fraction of the population because most people are inherently lazy and always look for the easy way out. The public sector is perfect for them and is why they gravitate to it rather than be held responsible for their actions in the private sector.

Now that school choice has been introduced, parents have a choice about which school to send their kids, which creates competition between schools to do better and attract more students. As I said before, competition would be part of a truly progressive stance as it promotes innovation and new ideas.