"Single payer because other countries do it"

[upaloopa]

Is that enough to get people to vote for your candidate.

Someone says "well let's take a closer look at that."

Oh no! You lurched to the right!

Hell you look at a used car closer before you buy it than you do at Bernie's ideas.

[ibegurpard]

1. single payer because our system is fucked beyond repair

And other countries have EITHER single payer or single payer hybrids that work well and keep costs down. AND they don't saddle their small businesses with the cost.

[upaloopa]

5. How do I know what you are saying is real?

I have never seen a white paper or anything about single payer for the United States.
What is wrong with getting the real data before making a choice?

[newfie11]

37. What we have now is terrible

There are countries using single player now and are extremely happy with it.

I guess for research look at how those countries manage it.

[yeoman6987]

48. There are many in America that like our system now

I am one of them. We don't have to change again after ACA is hitting its stride. Most poor and working class have decent health care now.

[newfie11]

50. I'm on Medicare and ChampVA

So I could care less what America does.

[yeoman6987]

51. Does the majority like their Heath care? Yes. Democracy works

You and I get one vote.

[Kentonio]

69. If you like what you have now

Unless you're extremely wealthy, then you probably have never experienced a universal healthcare system. Its not just about having coverage, its about the whole process of using the system.

Imagine getting ill, and the only thing you have to focus on is getting well again. Never having to spend even a second worrying about deductibles or whether this or that treatment is covered under your plan. Never having to fill out a form or make calls to your insurance. Just see a doctor, get treatment and go home. The difference that makes is priceless.

[yeoman6987]

70. Well actually I did use the Italian program

It was free but in 2011, the still used bottles for IVs and had older technology then we do for operations. Did I survive? Yes. But with universal health care their is a price in not necessarily getting the frills. Maybe we don't need them. I also am not sure how Americans would like being in wards with 8 other patients. We'll see.

[Kentonio]

72. Hmm..

I don't want to offend any Italians, but Italy is.. lets just say its not the best example to use of anything involving the state..

[HerbChestnut]

45. Do. Your. Research.

Economic reports are a good place to start.

[bobbobbins01]

3. How about this...

When a democratic candidate says lets increase our airstrikes, get an authorization for use of military force, and claims Iran and ISIS are part of the same problem, we should all stop and say "well let's take a closer look at that."

Your candidate is pushing for war and you're trying to argue against healthcare for all Americans. You should "take a closer look" at your priorities.

[upaloopa]

9. I agree. I expect experts to critique each

candidate's military positions.
I invite a critique of Hillary's speech by experts

[bobbobbins01]

10. What a cop out.

Think for yourself. Do you want more war or not?

[arcane1]

18. What are experts saying about our appalling health care system?

[Matariki]

49. yo

[Aerows]

4. Uh, yeah

No.

Nice try. It's because our health care costs, drug prices and medical system is screwed up. If you want to live in a society where education and health care are things funded by your tax dollars, so do I.

If you want to live in a society where millions are unable to afford health care or have become indentured servants to pay off their education, while funding blowing up people in other countries, I do not.

Pick one. I do not pick option #2, and it is, indeed, quite a bunch of #2.

[upaloopa]

11. Sorry those are not our only choices

As I said nobody that I know of has put together a report on what single payer in the US would look like or cost.

[Aerows]

23. Actually, yes, they are.

You can gild the lily all day long, but those are the facts.

You can pretend all day long that there is a study to prolong the obvious, but that is all that it is. Prolonging the obvious and many of us are tired of waiting for those who want nothing better to quit stalling.

We either do things differently, or we keep doing to the same shit that is destroying far too many Americans.

I'm in the "do things differently" wing.

Anybody that wants to be in the "maybe things will improve if I stall long enough" camp can wait for the magical study that shows unicorns can shit rainbows + how bombing some other people somehow improves lives, can talk to the hand.

[Ron Green]

33. Please don't be a dumbass.

http://www.pnhp.org/
http://fixithealthcare.com/
http://therealnews.com/t2/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=31&Itemid=74&jumival=8638

There's been tons of good study and work on US single-payer.

[newfie11]

40. Thank you! Nt

[Broward]

6. Your conservatism is showing.

[upaloopa]

12. What does that even mean?

If it is meant to put me down you lose.
Is it conservative to try to understand single payer? If so conservatives are smarter than us.

[Broward]

17. Sure, that's what you're doing. Trying to understand single payer.

[Romulox]

7. But that would be SOSHIALISM!!!! Plus, they would tax the Middle Class!11!!!

Ever try to live on only $250,000 a year???????

[restorefreedom]

8. not because other countries do it

because health care is not a commodity to be purchased by the wealthy but a basic right for all people in a civilized country.

single payer because its the right thing to do.

[upaloopa]

14. Do any of you ever look any deeper than words?

My god!

[AgingAmerican]

16. WE do

But obviously YOU don't.

[restorefreedom]

24. what would you like me to look at?

the obscene cost of meds and procedures?
the high infant and mother mortality rate?
the high rate of completely preventable disease and death?
people having to choose between medicine and heat?
thousands upon thousands dying because can't afford basic care?
the greedy pharma and insurance system that cares more about profits than lives?

what other aspects of the wonderful u.s. health care system should i be looking at?

[Recursion]

65. Then why do so few countries do it?

It's not remotely common.

[restorefreedom]

80. most modern countries

do not have the predatory insurance/big pharma system we have. it takes different forms, but "socialized medicine", single payer, government sponsored, in some form is in most other modern countries. people do not have to choose between heat and meds. except us.

[Recursion]

81. Yep. But we're committed to dying on the hill of being just like Canada

When there's an OECD full of other ways to get to the same goal, which are more politically obtainable.

[restorefreedom]

82. i dn't know what oecd means...

but i generally agree. i would like to see people have low cost affordable health care for all without the greedy stranglehold of insurance companies and big pharma. profit and medicine have to be untwined. i think medicare for all is a good way, but if people have other ideas to get there, i am willing to listen.

what are you thinking would be a good option?

[arcane1]

13. Strawman. And a lame one at that. Single Payer because it's the best option. It works.

There, I fixed it for you.

[upaloopa]

19. You haven't done shit. People are not willing to vote for that

I may be offering the best political advice you'll ever get! Explain it to people don't expect them to vote for an ideal!

[arcane1]

22. I thought you wanted to listen to experts, not DUers

[bobbobbins01]

25. So now its because people won't vote for it?

You're making a whole lot of excuses against something that would benefit everyone. Why?

[Aerows]

26. Oh. I see

Telling everyone to "wait, things will get better" when for many they have gotten worse or at the very least not improved works out so well.

Hang on a minute folks - all we have to do is nothing but what we have been doing, and suddenly things will all turn out differently.

There's a term for that.

[AgingAmerican]

15. Cheaper with better outcomes

Not beholden to psychopathic middlemen.

[upaloopa]

21. You'll stay at 25% to 30% with that

If you are going to move people you have to prove to them that what you say makes sense.

[bobbobbins01]

27. You said yourself that single payer was the ideal

Why would you actively fight against the ideal? Shouldn't you fight for it?

[AgingAmerican]

30. Coming from you that is meaningless

Because you obviously haven't read his basic proposals.

[reformist2]

20. The current system - ObamaRomneycare - is not working.

[PatrickforO]

28. I want single payer and have for decades. The only thing that makes any sense

is to expand the Medicare infrastructure for everyone and not tie it to employment.

My life, and the lives of most other people posting on here, including yours, upaloopa, would be better if this were the case.

[Aerows]

29. Hey, do you think you could

come up with a spin on how breathing oxygen is bad for you?

Because it sounds like you are working up to that particular pinnacle.

[upaloopa]

32. Can you explain how we put single payer in place

and what it costs and how we pay for it?

[Aerows]

35. You first - tell me why breathing oxygen is bad. n/t

[99Forever]

31. Said......

....nobody....


....ever.

[Scootaloo]

34. Well, we examine two things.

1) Why do other countries do it?

Ask 'em. Any answer other than a blank stare of mild confusion that someone would ask, will follow hte lins of "because people need to have health care. Being healthy is a human right."

2) [What is the net effect in these other countries?

Fact is, people in these countries with single payer tend to be healthier, less-stressed, and actually have more money - even with the increase in taxation to fund the programs, they still end up paying less individually than they would (and we do) under privatized health care. Yet they get equal, if not better medical service. Not just that, but everyone is covered.

Take as close a look as you want. You'll find that it's the right thing to do, and that the benefits far outweigh the costs.

[enid602]

79. Medicare for all

But then, you have to ask, why doesn't Europe have single payer? They don't you know, and the EU is comparable to the US in terms of population and GDP. Sure, each country within the EU has some form of Universal Healthcare, and for that I applaud them. Germany, for example has had universal healthcare since 1848, when much of our economy was based on slavery.

But while England does have 'Medicare for all,' the rest do not. Many countries, such as France, have healthcare that is administered solely through insurance companies, and they seem to be doing well.

Medicare is already the largest single payer in the world, bar none. To say it can be tripled in scope easily is simplistic.

[Warren DeMontague]

36. She laid out a big ol case for expansive and endless war, & more warrantless surveillance; combined

With the sort of unchecked "security tools for law enforcement" that are sold to the public as vital for terror-fighting --- and end up getting used to spy on granny in case she has a pot plant growing in her basement to ease her chemo nausea.


Is that "rightward" enough for ya?

[slipslidingaway]

61. You need to speak up for a cause and we know the cause :( n/t

[TIME TO PANIC]

38. Single payer because we can

and it's the moral thing to do!

[BootinUp]

39. We don't want to think too hard

Lets just try to elect someone that bashes capitalism.

[TIME TO PANIC]

42. I heard that same comment on Fox News.

[BootinUp]

44. care to expand your thoughts?

[MaggieD]

41. About 50% of voters support single payer

I think that would drop once people realized they'd have to pay at least an increase of 10% in federal taxes (FICA portion, so no exemption or deduction).

Not to mention congress won't even let it get out of committee. Bernie is not a realistic guy. That's why he has little to nothing to show for 25 years in congress.

[MaggieD]

60. No, your current FICA is 8% so would be 18%

.... under Bernie's plan. Math. That's why he won't tell you about how it is paid for. And while you may be fine with it the reality is most people won't be, and no one in congress will be. It is a HUGE increase in taxes.

[MaggieD]

63. He won't mention it because he knows....

A tax increase more than doubling FICA taxes will not be supported by congress or the American people. At what point do you folks join us in reality land? I don't mean to be rude in any way, but why are you so intent on a politician that promises nothing more than ponies that will never be delivered?

How does that help ANYONE?

[NorthCarolina]

43. Because the discussion is over. Single payer is clearly the best way forward. eom

[sadoldgirl]

46. I suggest that you go to Canada,

and ask the people whether they would like
to go back to their individual health insurance
plans or to something like the ACA.

I am sure that you would cause a lot of
laughter with that proposal.

[Doctor_J]

47. "worst healthcare in the world because it's the best we can do"

Is that enough to get people to vote for your candidate? Because that's her healthcare plan.

[longship]

52. Not other, all of our allied democracies. ALL OF THEM!!

If one understands how insurance works and some basic statistics, single payer is a no brainier.

That is why nearly everybody else does it.

Except for the USA.

[Recursion]

64. That's just not true though. France has 30% copays. Germany has private insurance

The Scandinavian countries have fairly high deductibles. Taiwan has fees at delivery. The Netherlands have private insurance. Australia has 25% copays. New Zealand dismantled its single payer system recently to replace it with a private insurance system.

Canada and the UK are very unusual in having health care that's actually free at delivery.

[longship]

66. You are correct.

However, none of these countries have solely made the private insurance companies the center of the program.

Single payer makes the most sense because it spreads the risk most equitably, which, after all, is what insurance is all about.

Your point is correct, my friend. I stand corrected. However, one cannot escape the statistical truths behind single payer.

[Recursion]

67. You're right: they all made holding down provider costs the main part of it

Which for some reason our party simply refuses to look at much. Personally I like France's model: 30% copay for many treatments (but not preventive stuff on one end or critical interventions on the other), a private insurance market and public subsidies to cover that 30%, and much, much lower prices from providers (not just pharma, though that's a part of it: doctors, hospitals, labs, devices...)

[longship]

68. As usual, we agree.

My favorite health plan is Canada, where everybody is covered for free. And the UK, which has a two tier system in which everybody is covered. Also, Taiwan.

That is the metric. Everybody gets healthcare, whether one can afford it or not. It has become a human right.

My best to you, my friend.

[Kentonio]

71. It's not quite that simple in France

People on welfare don't pay any deductible and the 30% is often automatically covered by private schemes run by employers.

I was also told recently by a French doctor that France is changing to a more NHS like system very soon.

[Recursion]

73. I can only fit so much on a subject line, but true

France's system has a lot of moving parts (I've posted about it here a lot, admiringly). But the basic concept is that the government limits costs, and pays 70% of them. And sure, there's an active private insurance market for the remaining 30%.

My central point remains that single payer is a means, not an end to itself.

[Kentonio]

74. There are certainly some things which the French system excels at

But it suffers from the French disease of being wildly over-complicated and bureaucratic. I think that's one of the primary reasons why they're trying to change to a simpler system, as well as moving their income tax system to a version of PAYE from next year.

I don't disagree on single payer as such, really the single payer part is just about getting better value from the health providers. How you construct the system around that principle is of course completely up for debate about how best suits each countries needs.

[Recursion]

75. So why are *providers* the one part of this nobody will talk about?

German doctors start at €45K and literally legally max out at €88K. And we can't even get Congress to stop the "doctor fix", after 20 years.

[Kentonio]

76. It needs to be talked about.

Although it's worth mentioning that if you take away the simple vast student loans doctors accumulate that would help sell the idea of a lower wage structure quite well I think. I know doctors who expect to still be paying off their loans into their 60's, which is just insanity.

Also there's no need for the private healthcare industry to be totally abolished. You can still have that avenue open to doctors without wage caps if they choose to take it. That's how it works in the UK.

[Recursion]

78. Absolutely agree about the loans

It's part and parcel with the way Med school slots are artificially limited.

[Warren Stupidity]

53. Um uh because it demonstrably works with

better outcomes and lower costs.

[tazkcmo]

54. It's enough

to not vote for yours.

[99Forever]

55. Tell me there, uploopy.

Name just ONE nation in the world that is interested in changing from their Single Payer system to the fucking rigged game in the USA.

Just ONE.

I won't be holding my breath waiting.

[jeff47]

56. I really hope you keep using this line of attack.

Emphasizing that Clinton wants me to pay $10,000/year to insurance companies because "it's not a tax" is TOTALLY a winning platform. You should do nothing but shout it continuously.

[MrMickeysMom]

58. What of kindergarten analysis is THIS?

Perhaps you should get your hands on some peer reviewed research. For decades, it's been published internationally by groups inside and outside the U.S. Groups like Physicians for a National Health Program make this easy to read the archives.

Inform yourself, and perhaps you'll quit assuming this is a gimmick to get votes. The idea of single payer actually improves health care outcomes and costs significantly less.

Under a single-payer system, all residents of the U.S. would be covered for all medically necessary services, including doctor, hospital, preventive, long-term care, mental health, reproductive health care, dental, vision, prescription drug and medical supply costs.

In order to not go broke over staying well, or dealing with a costly medical condition, a person should not have to BUY an insurance plan, only to be driven by high premiums or deductibles, which is based the cost of treating you only when you're sick, rather than covering routine health designed avoid emergent care.

Most of the reason the middle class is strapped into so much debt is either due to the cost of health insurance, poor wage, and no time to take care of they and their families.

[Avalux]

59. Single payer because everyone, regardless of social status, deserves to live. n/t

[merrily]

77. Silly. Not because other countries do it. Because the results are better with Medicare for All.

Both the medical outcomes and the financial outcomes.