I'll accept single payer so long as they make sure all the dumbasses that oppose vaccinations are not covered. No need to pay for hospital stays for preventable illness.
Oklahoma refused the Medicaid expansion because they understood, and rightly so, that they would be left with the bill after a few years and Oklahoma's demographic would break the bank. By all accounts, the progression of the ACA has shown this to be true.
You haven't posted "hard data" you've posted the equivalent to coulda, shoulda, woulda via superficial and in some cases, delusional math. Again, the same kind of B.S. the democrats pushed upon the public before the ACA.
The point I'm making about medicare is that it is one closer examples of "single payer" in the U.S. and it's riddled with significant costs and fraud.... because again.... the bureaucracy can't keep up. This is after an individual pays into it all of his life, then has to pay: Part B premiums, any sort of medigap/supplement to fill in the coverage, then they have to pay part D coverage. Of which doesn't even cover the full cost of the drugs.
Of course we could spend several pages talking about the VA next? How's the VA worked out for Veterans? Vermont's single payer sure worked out well eh?
No matter how many articles you post, the real world shows that single payer in the U.S. is a fantasy.
I'm all for a single-payer system. I've lived and worked in several countries with single-payer systems (which vary greatly), and in general the benefits far outweigh the costs. I'm not sure it'll work out on a state-by-state basis, and will likely need a federal based system to obtain maximum effectiveness.
sooo according to you these folks that I've listed are superficial, delusional and full of BS: JAMA Oncology, Physicians for a National Health Program, American Medical Assoc, etc.
ya right .. opinions are like ***holes, I accept that we all have one.
Last edited:
Haha....JAMA is an entire network of PRJ's. It seems you're trying to post this as a support group? Here's where facts in lieu of opinion count.
The AMA? From your own Physicians for Nations Health blog...... AMA position on single payer - PNHP's Official Blog Pay specific attention where they cite the AMA states that single payer systems are understaffed and cause long waiting periods. Or another.... http://www.nytimes.com/2009/06/11/us/politics/11health.html?_r=0
It seems your links and "opinion" dismissal have kind of blown up on ya.... it kind if helps if you understand what you are posting. Either way we have several opinions of what will happen on your side. We have the facts of single payer failures via Medicare, the VA, Canadian and UK shortfalls on the other. Of which if we get into the real world logistics of their failures or shortcomings, they are ignored because you are looking for a handout.
where are you coming from? really stretching things are we? I used a chart based on data from the AMA earlier which you proceed to called BS, etc. .. if I've got to chose between your opinion vs the AMA .. I'm going with the American Medical Assoc everytime.
sure seems you are the one that doesn't understand what you are posting ...
Last edited:
It's not my opinion....the situations I have posted concerning medicare, the VA, Vermont, Canada, and the UK are real world scenarios. If one applies any sort of reasoning or critical thinking on the subject you simply ignore it. Surely though, you're intelligent enough to understand the VA has significant problems? That Medicare still costs the end user quite a bit of money if they are sick and on meds? That Canada has long waiting lines for diagnostics with inferior and more invasive procedures? Or is it your ego won't let you consider what is happening in the real world under single payer systems?
In terms of your autistic like insistence on the AMA validation. I posted exactly what the AMA has stated on the subject..... Hint: They're not a fan of Single Payer.
However, to shed some light who they really are.
Whom Does the American Medical Association Really Work For?
Cliff Notes:
- 17% of Doctors in the U.S. belong to the AMA........hopefully... you understand that's not a majority?
- In 2011... the AMA was polled and thus they said 70% of the doctors don't represent their views on Obamacare. Of which, the AMA gave it's approval of Obamacare.
- The AMA receives 2 times the revenue from the government than it does it's members. Hence it's approval on Obamacare I'm sure.
In terms of your autistic like insistence on the AMA validation. I posted exactly what the AMA has stated on the subject..... Hint: They're not a fan of Single Payer.
However, to shed some light who they really are.
Whom Does the American Medical Association Really Work For?
Cliff Notes:
- 17% of Doctors in the U.S. belong to the AMA........hopefully... you understand that's not a majority?
- In 2011... the AMA was polled and thus they said 70% of the doctors don't represent their views on Obamacare. Of which, the AMA gave it's approval of Obamacare.
- The AMA receives 2 times the revenue from the government than it does it's members. Hence it's approval on Obamacare I'm sure.
I'm all for getting government completely out of the health insurance business and seeing if private industry can un**** the mess the government has created.
That'd mean opening the business up to competition, and even the insurers probably don't want that.
Imagine if a person in OK could buy a policy from anywhere in the US... madness i tell you!
It would also mean that service providers could adjust cash rates to reasonable rates.
Similar threads
