Forum
»
The universal healthcare debate for the US
09-15-2022, 06:39 AM
-
#31
- freeheeler
- Registered User
-
- freeheeler
- Registered User
- Join Date: Jun 2002
- Location: United States
- Age: 65
- Posts: 11,675
- Rep Power: 83841
-
-
UK is a roaring success story. Who wouldn't want this m
https://www.england.nhs.uk/blog/wear...ds-big-impact/
The latest figures for July 2022 show:
a record of over 6.84 million people waiting for treatment
2.67 million patients waiting over 18 weeks for treatment, a further increase from last month
377,689 patients waiting over one year for treatment - over 365 times the 1,032 people waiting over a year pre-pandemic in July 2019
a median waiting time for treatment of 13.3 weeks – significantly higher than the pre-COVID duration.
But thankfully, they are making sure that people use the right pronouns for tranniesa record of over 6.84 million people waiting for treatment
2.67 million patients waiting over 18 weeks for treatment, a further increase from last month
377,689 patients waiting over one year for treatment - over 365 times the 1,032 people waiting over a year pre-pandemic in July 2019
a median waiting time for treatment of 13.3 weeks – significantly higher than the pre-COVID duration.
https://www.england.nhs.uk/blog/wear...ds-big-impact/
Scubastevo :-What percentage of women have STDs? (serious) If I just wanted to go bareback with any girl that I could get with, what are my chances of ending up bed ridden with STDs?
09-15-2022, 06:49 AM
-
#32
- badreligion
- Meh
-
- badreligion
- Meh
- Join Date: Jan 2006
- Location: Groton, Connecticut, United States
- Posts: 25,200
- Rep Power: 55006
-
-
Originally Posted By XPmpnII⏩
This is my take on it as well, I agree with all of it. My father has to deal with the VA and it's a f ucking nightmare....There has been talk of giving Vets a type of credit card that they use if they have to go a doctor or something and they use it at the location and the VA pays it which makes sense but instead, at least where I am, if my father has an appointment he can't go to any of the local hospitals he has to drive 45 minutes to and from a location for a 20 minute appointment. The VA is horribly run and people think that letting the government take care of healthcare will make it better. I'm not saying our healthcare system is perfect, far from it but like you said, people hear "free" and that's all it takes not realizing that nothing is free, someone is always footing the bill.Why are ppl in favor of this for the US? Some ppl were talking about it today and I’m just like…. I don’t get it
Every place they mention that has it implemented…. Canada, Australia, Norway etc…. All these places are like legit the size of a single state here in the US lmao
And it’s like some ppl act like there’s zero downsides to it. They just hear the word “free” and they’re automatically on board and all of a sudden you’re a terrible human being if you don’t support “free healthcare” because that means you are apparently cold hearted and give zero fks about people struggling or less fortunate than you
I mean, look at the VA for example. That’s a gov’t funded healthcare…. I can’t say I hear tons of praise for it. Actually I’ve heard the exact opposite
Plus we all know us taxpayers would have to pay for it.
I don’t wanna have to pay more money for random John Doe over here who’s 350 lbs and a daily smoker and suffers from diabetes and a plethora of other self-inflicted health issues who’s been rejected from insurance but now is afforded allllllll sorts of treatments and doctors visits thanks to “free healthcare” that’s nothing but more money taken out of my pocket and every other taxpayer
Like is there even incentive to be healthy anymore at that point?
Every place they mention that has it implemented…. Canada, Australia, Norway etc…. All these places are like legit the size of a single state here in the US lmao
And it’s like some ppl act like there’s zero downsides to it. They just hear the word “free” and they’re automatically on board and all of a sudden you’re a terrible human being if you don’t support “free healthcare” because that means you are apparently cold hearted and give zero fks about people struggling or less fortunate than you
I mean, look at the VA for example. That’s a gov’t funded healthcare…. I can’t say I hear tons of praise for it. Actually I’ve heard the exact opposite
Plus we all know us taxpayers would have to pay for it.
I don’t wanna have to pay more money for random John Doe over here who’s 350 lbs and a daily smoker and suffers from diabetes and a plethora of other self-inflicted health issues who’s been rejected from insurance but now is afforded allllllll sorts of treatments and doctors visits thanks to “free healthcare” that’s nothing but more money taken out of my pocket and every other taxpayer
Like is there even incentive to be healthy anymore at that point?
In Hoots We Trust.
09-15-2022, 06:50 AM
-
#33
- frankdtank20
- Registered User
-
- frankdtank20
- Registered User
- Join Date: Nov 2020
- Posts: 27,464
- Rep Power: 171374
-
-
There are tons of ways to improve US health care, and I'm even for an expansion of Medicaid so it's available to more people. Since the govt is already regulating health care so much they should be forcing hospitals to compete on what they charge. Most healthcare is not emergency care, so something like women giving birth or various knee surgeries, etc should have standard prices listed everywhere.
Yeah Buddyyy! Light weight! Light weight baby!!!!
09-15-2022, 07:00 AM
-
#34
09-15-2022, 07:12 AM
-
#35
- Dave22reborn
- Cold Hearted SOB
-
- Dave22reborn
- Cold Hearted SOB
- Join Date: Jan 2005
- Location: Ill.
- Posts: 120,479
- Rep Power: 316531
-
-
These same posters promoting Universal healthcare were the same ones saying the unvaccinated should be denied healthcare......
09-15-2022, 07:23 AM
-
#36
Originally Posted By freeheeler⏩
What you describe isn't a universal healthcare issue, it is a UK issue.UK is a roaring success story. Who wouldn't want this m
But thankfully, they are making sure that people use the right pronouns for trannies
https://www.england.nhs.uk/blog/wear...ds-big-impact/
But thankfully, they are making sure that people use the right pronouns for trannies
https://www.england.nhs.uk/blog/wear...ds-big-impact/
In the UK they don't have single payer [essentially the government acts as the insurer and pays the bills] they have government operated healthcare [the government owns and runs the facilities; pays the the healthcare workers].
Then above that they have also starved their health system of funding relative to spending in other EU countries.
^^^
Obviously dated but compare per person spending:
US: $10,000+ per person per year
Switzerland: $7,000+ per person per year
Sweden + Germany: roughly $6,000 per person per year
UK: Less than $4,000 per person per year
The pronoun/trans thing is an infection with a mental virus which isn't restricted to the UK.
*Notice the US spending more per person per year in public spending [Medicaid/CHIPs/Medicare/VA/Etc.] than UK spent in total per person.*
Originally Posted By badreligion⏩
I'm sorry that your father has had a bad experience with the VA. My ex husband's uncle had a terrible time with the VA also. Vietnam vet; Agent Orange exposure. He was a neat guy and a great storyteller. Lies for days.This is my take on it as well, I agree with all of it.My father has to deal with the VA and it's a f ucking nightmare....There has been talk of giving Vets a type of credit card that they use if they have to go a doctor or something and they use it at the location and the VA pays it which makes sense but instead, at least where I am, if my father has an appointment he can't go to any of the local hospitals he has to drive 45 minutes to and from a location for a 20 minute appointment. The VA is horribly run and people think that letting the government take care of healthcare will make it better. I'm not saying our healthcare system is perfect, far from it but like you said, people hear "free" and that's all it takes not realizing that nothing is free, someone is always footing the bill.
But again, that is *government run healthcare*, not *single payer healthcare*.
Single payer just means that instead of having private insurance companies that pool risk to lower the overall risk to each person the government takes that role so that risk of financial ruin due to healthcare expenses is spread across the entire population and doesn't destroy individuals.
That is how insurance is supposed to work. You pay a premium to protect yourself from an overwhelming loss.
If you have private health insurance of some kind then *you are already paying for the drinkers, the druggies, and the fat asses*. Because that is how insurance works. You are sharing risk with all the other enrollees.
It is just that with private health insurance you are paying for the fatties + also paying some extra on top of that to create a profit for the insurance company.
I don't understand why this concept appears to be difficult for some people to grasp.
INTP Crew
Inattentive ADD Crew
Mom That Miscs Crew
09-15-2022, 07:33 AM
-
#37
For real, think about it for just a minute.
How can you avoid paying any extra healthcare expenses associated with poor lifestyle habits while also benefiting from the shared risk of having insurance?
It seems to me you would have to:
- establish a health insurance pool that only included people who meet your standards for good health habits...not fat people, no drug users, no heavy drinkers, no smokers
[Probably illegal under current law. You might be able to pull it off as a private group like ParsleyTea mentioned.]
- require an annual physical for all members of this insurance pool because people can get fat, start smoking, etc.
[An expense, would require administration of some kind, and again potentially a legal issue...discrimination.]
- pay all of the premiums out of your own pocket OR find an employer willing to pay into this specific healthcare insurance plan that you have chosen
[Impractical for the majority of people as employers pay the largest portion of the premium and I've not heard of any that let YOU pick the insurance company.]
So good luck with not paying any money for people who don't have good health habits.
How can you avoid paying any extra healthcare expenses associated with poor lifestyle habits while also benefiting from the shared risk of having insurance?
It seems to me you would have to:
- establish a health insurance pool that only included people who meet your standards for good health habits...not fat people, no drug users, no heavy drinkers, no smokers
[Probably illegal under current law. You might be able to pull it off as a private group like ParsleyTea mentioned.]
- require an annual physical for all members of this insurance pool because people can get fat, start smoking, etc.
[An expense, would require administration of some kind, and again potentially a legal issue...discrimination.]
- pay all of the premiums out of your own pocket OR find an employer willing to pay into this specific healthcare insurance plan that you have chosen
[Impractical for the majority of people as employers pay the largest portion of the premium and I've not heard of any that let YOU pick the insurance company.]
So good luck with not paying any money for people who don't have good health habits.
INTP Crew
Inattentive ADD Crew
Mom That Miscs Crew
09-15-2022, 08:01 AM
-
#38
- Stizzel
- Rothbardian
-
- Stizzel
- Rothbardian
- Join Date: Apr 2008
- Location: Your Mom
- Posts: 83,764
- Subscribers: 1
- Rep Power: 384419
-
-
Originally Posted By PumkinPie⏩
Who's mind should it be on? Getting cancer sucks but Im not sure why that means its okay to make strangers pay for itWas against the idea of universal healthcare but the US system sucks. Being tied to your job is a major downside and if your self employed or your job options suck then you are basically SOL. The obamacare ones are ****ty and overpriced. Favorite thing is when I switch jobs and I have to wait X amount of days before the insurance kicks.
Do I hate the idea of fat assses being paid for, yes but if someone I know gets cancer then health insurance shouldnt even be on their mind.
Do I hate the idea of fat assses being paid for, yes but if someone I know gets cancer then health insurance shouldnt even be on their mind.
“It’s the bill of rights, not the bill of requests. Rights are not up for negotiations.” Thomas Massie, MAGA enemy #1
09-15-2022, 08:12 AM
-
#39
Originally Posted By katya422⏩
A large local construction company has some sort of deal with their insurer and employees wear fitness trackers. The dude I mountain bike with doesn't just get "free" health insurance, he actually profits compared to some of his coworkers.For real, think about it for just a minute.
How can you avoid paying any extra healthcare expenses associated with poor lifestyle habits while also benefiting from the shared risk of having insurance?
It seems to me you would have to:
- establish a health insurance pool that only included people who meet your standards for good health habits...not fat people, no drug users, no heavy drinkers, no smokers
[Probably illegal under current law. You might be able to pull it off as a private group like ParsleyTea mentioned.]
- require an annual physical for all members of this insurance pool because people can get fat, start smoking, etc.
[An expense, would require administration of some kind, and again potentially a legal issue...discrimination.]
- pay all of the premiums out of your own pocket OR find an employer willing to pay into this specific healthcare insurance plan that you have chosen
[Impractical for the majority of people as employers pay the largest portion of the premium and I've not heard of any that let YOU pick the insurance company.]
So good luck with not paying any money for people who don't have good health habits.
How can you avoid paying any extra healthcare expenses associated with poor lifestyle habits while also benefiting from the shared risk of having insurance?
It seems to me you would have to:
- establish a health insurance pool that only included people who meet your standards for good health habits...not fat people, no drug users, no heavy drinkers, no smokers
[Probably illegal under current law. You might be able to pull it off as a private group like ParsleyTea mentioned.]
- require an annual physical for all members of this insurance pool because people can get fat, start smoking, etc.
[An expense, would require administration of some kind, and again potentially a legal issue...discrimination.]
- pay all of the premiums out of your own pocket OR find an employer willing to pay into this specific healthcare insurance plan that you have chosen
[Impractical for the majority of people as employers pay the largest portion of the premium and I've not heard of any that let YOU pick the insurance company.]
So good luck with not paying any money for people who don't have good health habits.
09-15-2022, 09:17 AM
-
#40
- scooterbrah
- Registered Pureblood
-
- scooterbrah
- Registered Pureblood
- Join Date: Jan 2011
- Location: Scottsdale, Arizona, United States
- Posts: 22,464
- Rep Power: 308215
-
-
hard pass for me. nothing our gov does is cost efficient or well managed. this would be no different.
MinisterOfLust: scooterbrah and Mcfreoko are the two worst posters here.
09-15-2022, 10:09 AM
-
#41
Originally Posted By Stizzel⏩
But that is how insurance works.Who's mind should it be on? Getting cancer sucks but Im not sure why that means its okay to make strangers pay for it
A group of individuals pool their resources to cover a potentially financially overwhelming risk. Everyone who is a member of the insurance pool pays for the expenses of other members that exceed a defined individual contribution.
With government single payer the size of the pool is much larger [everyone] so the risk is spread out as much as possible giving each individual the smallest amount of achievable risk.
The only way to not pay for anyone else's healthcare would be to have a fully private system with no public funding at all and no insurance system wherein individuals would have to "self-insure", meaning that every individual would have to accumulate enough personal resources to cover the full expense of any medical need they may have.
I don't believe many people are capable of that given the high costs of care, even if the cost were cut by half. The last chart I have there for the US is $10,000 per person per year in healthcare spending. Meanwhile more than half of individuals have an annual income before taxes of less than $50K.
So can every living breathing soul in this country [children and elderly too] earn $5,000 a year which is designated strictly for medical expenses and set aside into an account that isn't tapped for any other expenses?
Because that [or something close] would be the minimum requirement for this "not paying for other people's healthcare" thing to work.
Every man, woman, and child would have to earn/save $5,000 a year for medical expenses regardless of their age, income, or personal health.
And that still wouldn't save a lot of people if they get hit with a very expensive illness [cancer] early in life before their personal health insurance fund has reached a large enough amount to cover such a high expense.
INTP Crew
Inattentive ADD Crew
Mom That Miscs Crew
09-15-2022, 10:26 AM
-
#42
BTW if you hate universal healthcare coverage because "socialism" or the government sucks, I get it.
That doesn't change the objective reality though that a shared risk makes more sense for overall community success and health.
Kind of like the net zero/green agenda types that want us to switch to "all renewable energy" and cut CO2 emissions to zero- if you dig into it at all it is obvious that what they want to do can not work without killing a lot of people and/or lowering living standards.
They don't want to believe that, but it is just reality. We can not flip over to some kumbaya green New Eden reality with our current population and with the living standards that those in industrialized nations are accustomed to.
That doesn't change the objective reality though that a shared risk makes more sense for overall community success and health.
Kind of like the net zero/green agenda types that want us to switch to "all renewable energy" and cut CO2 emissions to zero- if you dig into it at all it is obvious that what they want to do can not work without killing a lot of people and/or lowering living standards.
They don't want to believe that, but it is just reality. We can not flip over to some kumbaya green New Eden reality with our current population and with the living standards that those in industrialized nations are accustomed to.
INTP Crew
Inattentive ADD Crew
Mom That Miscs Crew
09-15-2022, 10:29 AM
-
#43
Originally Posted By katya422⏩
In addition to having a nice rack, this poster is correct. We're not talking about the government delivering the healthcare. We're talking about a national single payer system that operates as a type of insurance. Like Medicare.But that is how insurance works.
A group of individuals pool their resources to cover a potentially financially overwhelming risk. Everyone who is a member of the insurance pool pays for the expenses of other members that exceed a defined individual contribution.
With government single payer the size of the pool is much larger [everyone] so the risk is spread out as much as possible giving each individual the smallest amount of achievable risk.
The only way to not pay for anyone else's healthcare would be to have a fully private system with no public funding at all and no insurance system wherein individuals would have to "self-insure", meaning that every individual would have to accumulate enough personal resources to cover the full expense of any medical need they may have.
I don't believe many people are capable of that given the high costs of care, even if the cost were cut by half. The last chart I have there for the US is $10,000 per person per year in healthcare spending. Meanwhile more than half of individuals have an annual income before taxes of less than $50K.
So can every living breathing soul in this country [children and elderly too] earn $5,000 a year which is designated strictly for medical expenses and set aside into an account that isn't tapped for any other expenses?
Because that [or something close] would be the minimum requirement for this "not paying for other people's healthcare" thing to work.
Every man, woman, and child would have to earn/save $5,000 a year for medical expenses regardless of their age, income, or personal health.
And that still wouldn't save a lot of people if they get hit with a very expensive illness [cancer] early in life before their personal health insurance fund has reached a large enough amount to cover such a high expense.
A group of individuals pool their resources to cover a potentially financially overwhelming risk. Everyone who is a member of the insurance pool pays for the expenses of other members that exceed a defined individual contribution.
With government single payer the size of the pool is much larger [everyone] so the risk is spread out as much as possible giving each individual the smallest amount of achievable risk.
The only way to not pay for anyone else's healthcare would be to have a fully private system with no public funding at all and no insurance system wherein individuals would have to "self-insure", meaning that every individual would have to accumulate enough personal resources to cover the full expense of any medical need they may have.
I don't believe many people are capable of that given the high costs of care, even if the cost were cut by half. The last chart I have there for the US is $10,000 per person per year in healthcare spending. Meanwhile more than half of individuals have an annual income before taxes of less than $50K.
So can every living breathing soul in this country [children and elderly too] earn $5,000 a year which is designated strictly for medical expenses and set aside into an account that isn't tapped for any other expenses?
Because that [or something close] would be the minimum requirement for this "not paying for other people's healthcare" thing to work.
Every man, woman, and child would have to earn/save $5,000 a year for medical expenses regardless of their age, income, or personal health.
And that still wouldn't save a lot of people if they get hit with a very expensive illness [cancer] early in life before their personal health insurance fund has reached a large enough amount to cover such a high expense.
I have two questions for the nay-sayers.
1. Healthcare spending is already about 20% of GDP and increasing. This simply cannot be sustained. How do you propose to solve the problem?
2. If single payer is so bad, then why do the countries that have single payer have higher life expectancies and better overall health outcomes? Hmmmmmmm?
09-15-2022, 10:37 AM
-
#44
- isingmodel
- Registered User
-
- isingmodel
- Registered User
- Join Date: Mar 2019
- Age: 56
- Posts: 11,925
- Rep Power: 57442
-
-
Originally Posted By katya422⏩
I don't always rep, but when I do it's for highly informed posts like this. Unfortunately the two bit retards on this forum can't grasp numbers and other things like the aboveWhat you describe isn't a universal healthcare issue, it is a UK issue.
In the UK they don't have single payer [essentially the government acts as the insurer and pays the bills] they have government operated healthcare [the government owns and runs the facilities; pays the the healthcare workers].
Then above that they have also starved their health system of funding relative to spending in other EU countries.
^^^
Obviously dated but compare per person spending:
US: $10,000+ per person per year
Switzerland: $7,000+ per person per year
Sweden + Germany: roughly $6,000 per person per year
UK: Less than $4,000 per person per year
The pronoun/trans thing is an infection with a mental virus which isn't restricted to the UK.
*Notice the US spending more per person per year in public spending [Medicaid/CHIPs/Medicare/VA/Etc.] than UK spent in total per person.*
I'm sorry that your father has had a bad experience with the VA. My ex husband's uncle had a terrible time with the VA also. Vietnam vet; Agent Orange exposure. He was a neat guy and a great storyteller. Lies for days.
But again, that is *government run healthcare*, not *single payer healthcare*.
Single payer just means that instead of having private insurance companies that pool risk to lower the overall risk to each person the government takes that role so that risk of financial ruin due to healthcare expenses is spread across the entire population and doesn't destroy individuals.
That is how insurance is supposed to work. You pay a premium to protect yourself from an overwhelming loss.
If you have private health insurance of some kind then *you are already paying for the drinkers, the druggies, and the fat asses*. Because that is how insurance works. You are sharing risk with all the other enrollees.
It is just that with private health insurance you are paying for the fatties + also paying some extra on top of that to create a profit for the insurance company.
I don't understand why this concept appears to be difficult for some people to grasp.
In the UK they don't have single payer [essentially the government acts as the insurer and pays the bills] they have government operated healthcare [the government owns and runs the facilities; pays the the healthcare workers].
Then above that they have also starved their health system of funding relative to spending in other EU countries.
^^^
Obviously dated but compare per person spending:
US: $10,000+ per person per year
Switzerland: $7,000+ per person per year
Sweden + Germany: roughly $6,000 per person per year
UK: Less than $4,000 per person per year
The pronoun/trans thing is an infection with a mental virus which isn't restricted to the UK.
*Notice the US spending more per person per year in public spending [Medicaid/CHIPs/Medicare/VA/Etc.] than UK spent in total per person.*
I'm sorry that your father has had a bad experience with the VA. My ex husband's uncle had a terrible time with the VA also. Vietnam vet; Agent Orange exposure. He was a neat guy and a great storyteller. Lies for days.
But again, that is *government run healthcare*, not *single payer healthcare*.
Single payer just means that instead of having private insurance companies that pool risk to lower the overall risk to each person the government takes that role so that risk of financial ruin due to healthcare expenses is spread across the entire population and doesn't destroy individuals.
That is how insurance is supposed to work. You pay a premium to protect yourself from an overwhelming loss.
If you have private health insurance of some kind then *you are already paying for the drinkers, the druggies, and the fat asses*. Because that is how insurance works. You are sharing risk with all the other enrollees.
It is just that with private health insurance you are paying for the fatties + also paying some extra on top of that to create a profit for the insurance company.
I don't understand why this concept appears to be difficult for some people to grasp.
Misc Crypto Crew
BTC to $200k
09-15-2022, 08:51 PM
-
#45
- Hussar1
- Registered User
-
- Hussar1
- Registered User
- Join Date: May 2013
- Age: 50
- Posts: 3,826
- Rep Power: 10167
-
-
I'm willing to be that if we pumped the breaks on the billions we give to Ukraine, Saudi Arabia, Israel, etc...and on stupid foreign wars, we could probably build a decent healthcare system here.
The individual has always had to struggle to keep from being overwhelmed by the tribe. If you try it, you will be lonely often, and sometimes frightened. But no price is too high to pay for the privilege of owning yourself.
Friedrich Nietzsche
09-15-2022, 09:02 PM
-
#46
- tunejunkie
- Registered User
-
- tunejunkie
- Registered User
- Join Date: May 2010
- Age: 39
- Posts: 8,677
- Rep Power: 58060
-
-
Fuk that. BRB. 2 months to get an MRI, only to find out it’s torn, but now can’t be fixed because you waited too long….no thanks Jeff
09-15-2022, 09:29 PM
-
#47
- Antoine99
- Registered User
-
- Antoine99
- Registered User
- Join Date: Mar 2013
- Age: 35
- Posts: 14,302
- Rep Power: 82218
-
-
Was talking to a nurse and they said they went to England and the hospital "room" was like 12 beds, meanwhile we were in a single bed hospital room, jfl@universal healthcare
However insurance should be looked at to be reasonably priced, I take care of myself and I should get a massive discount because I'm not draining the system.
However insurance should be looked at to be reasonably priced, I take care of myself and I should get a massive discount because I'm not draining the system.
Would kick em in the nuts
09-15-2022, 09:40 PM
-
#48
Originally Posted By Dave22reborn⏩
FFS. Read my post, don't just look at my username and try to guess what I said. READING IS NOT HARD.If its so superior, why do people get private insurance in the UK???
GO LOCAL SPORTSBALL TEAM
*** Pureblood Master Race ***
*** Official Misc Photography Crew ***
09-15-2022, 11:05 PM
-
#49
- ChewYourFood
- ▪█───────█▪
-
- ChewYourFood
- ▪█───────█▪
- Join Date: Aug 2012
- Posts: 10,731
- Rep Power: 89931
-
-
The Covid response is prima facia evidence for why we can never have Universal Healthcare.
It allows the govt to say, if you dont get the jab - we won't cover any of your future medical expenses.
By providing healthcare & being able to restrict it - they get undue leverage over your autonomy.
It allows the govt to say, if you dont get the jab - we won't cover any of your future medical expenses.
By providing healthcare & being able to restrict it - they get undue leverage over your autonomy.
09-15-2022, 11:39 PM
-
#50
- Bodhy
- Paddling to New Zealand
-
- Bodhy
- Paddling to New Zealand
- Join Date: Mar 2020
- Posts: 17,326
- Rep Power: 0
-
-
I vote affirmative. While it would be funded with tax dollars, there's no way the state would getmoreinvolved with your life than it already is.
The only way it would interfere would be if it mandated you get aspecificplan, but that's not always the case. Universal healthcare also doesn't imply the government will invade your home after medical records.
The pros just outweigh the cons here, and much of it would be an assistance, not a mandate. I.e those who can afford it will have the choice of not paying for it anymore, or pay a bit more on top of what the government provides to get wider coverage.
Then there is those who can't afford healthcare at all, and that one is self-explanatory.
The only way it would interfere would be if it mandated you get aspecificplan, but that's not always the case. Universal healthcare also doesn't imply the government will invade your home after medical records.
The pros just outweigh the cons here, and much of it would be an assistance, not a mandate. I.e those who can afford it will have the choice of not paying for it anymore, or pay a bit more on top of what the government provides to get wider coverage.
Then there is those who can't afford healthcare at all, and that one is self-explanatory.
Back off, Warchild.
Seriously.
09-16-2022, 12:22 AM
-
#51
- rentfreein
- Banned
-
- rentfreein
- Banned
- Join Date: Aug 2022
- Age: 56
- Posts: 4,814
- Rep Power: 0
-
-
Liberals still pretend that CUba has great healthcare. Meanwhile, their doctors work 2nd jobs as taxi drivers
09-16-2022, 01:26 AM
-
#52
- AlwaysFocus
- Registered AI
-
- AlwaysFocus
- Registered AI
- Join Date: Sep 2016
- Location: BC, Canada
- Posts: 43,341
- Rep Power: 354666
-
-
Originally Posted By dakensta⏩
for once, I agree with youA badly implemented universal health care does not make universal healthcare bad, it makes doing it badly bad.
Let me put it another way, if a girl gives really bad BJs, that doesn't make you think BJs are intrinsically a bad thing, does it?
Surely The Greatest Country On Earth could do a good job of UHC, if it tried? Nah?
Let me put it another way, if a girl gives really bad BJs, that doesn't make you think BJs are intrinsically a bad thing, does it?
Surely The Greatest Country On Earth could do a good job of UHC, if it tried? Nah?
09-16-2022, 04:33 AM
-
#53
- Cleveland33
- Registered Gooner
-
- Cleveland33
- Registered Gooner
- Join Date: Jan 2010
- Location: Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, United States
- Posts: 66,951
- Rep Power: 497612
-
-
Simply put - the government should not be involved in like 90% of what it already is, I'm not ok with adding more.
09-16-2022, 05:55 AM
-
#54
- rentfreein
- Banned
-
- rentfreein
- Banned
- Join Date: Aug 2022
- Age: 56
- Posts: 4,814
- Rep Power: 0
-
-
Why not set up a big go fund me for everyone that needs money for major issues? Government increases cost of everything
09-16-2022, 06:01 AM
-
#55
- isingmodel
- Registered User
-
- isingmodel
- Registered User
- Join Date: Mar 2019
- Age: 56
- Posts: 11,925
- Rep Power: 57442
-
-
Originally Posted By rentfreein⏩
Panhandling to cover medical bills is a sure sign of a stable, functioning societyWhy not set up a big go fund me for everyone that needs money for major issues? Government increases cost of everything
Misc Crypto Crew
BTC to $200k
09-16-2022, 06:04 AM
-
#56
Implement labor camps for fat people. Get above a certain body fat %? Off to the camps to do hard label and subsist on gruel until back down to an acceptable one. Said camps could also be potentially used for some low level manufacturing - thus contributing to GDP while eliminating obesity. In this situation, perhaps Universal healthcare could be more feasible.
09-16-2022, 07:27 AM
-
#57
- jackamo2887
- BEATINGU
-
- jackamo2887
- BEATINGU
- Join Date: Oct 2007
- Posts: 29,617
- Rep Power: 146835
-
-
I would create a universal system for everyone but with the option for private service.
Everyone gets access of some kind..even if it's slow and ****ty..you won't end up 200,000 in debt. The thought of some family going into a crazy amount of debt, or even worse not getting any healthcare if their kid gets cancer is one of the most heartbreaking things on earth, in my opinion.
If you have money or a good job or whatever, you purchase a private plan that pushes you to the front of the line or allows you to see specific specialists.
Everyone gets access of some kind..even if it's slow and ****ty..you won't end up 200,000 in debt. The thought of some family going into a crazy amount of debt, or even worse not getting any healthcare if their kid gets cancer is one of the most heartbreaking things on earth, in my opinion.
If you have money or a good job or whatever, you purchase a private plan that pushes you to the front of the line or allows you to see specific specialists.
Survival. When the jungle tears itself down and builds itself into something new. Guys like you and me, we end up dead. Doesn’t really mean anything. Or, if we happen to live through it, well that doesn’t mean anything either.
09-16-2022, 10:22 AM
-
#58
- badreligion
- Meh
-
- badreligion
- Meh
- Join Date: Jan 2006
- Location: Groton, Connecticut, United States
- Posts: 25,200
- Rep Power: 55006
-
-
Originally Posted By katya422⏩
So how is it not government run healthcare? It's a novel idea in theory I'm all for helping people but the fact people have no accountability for stuff like this it will be abused. If people want this then there need to be stipulations...Like exercise, proper diet, weight management because why should someone who takes care of themselves have to pay for the 4th bypass on some fat f uck who has no will power and chain swallows Burger King?What you describe isn't a universal healthcare issue, it is a UK issue.
In the UK they don't have single payer [essentially the government acts as the insurer and pays the bills] they have government operated healthcare [the government owns and runs the facilities; pays the the healthcare workers].
Then above that they have also starved their health system of funding relative to spending in other EU countries.
^^^
Obviously dated but compare per person spending:
US: $10,000+ per person per year
Switzerland: $7,000+ per person per year
Sweden + Germany: roughly $6,000 per person per year
UK: Less than $4,000 per person per year
The pronoun/trans thing is an infection with a mental virus which isn't restricted to the UK.
*Notice the US spending more per person per year in public spending [Medicaid/CHIPs/Medicare/VA/Etc.] than UK spent in total per person.*
I'm sorry that your father has had a bad experience with the VA. My ex husband's uncle had a terrible time with the VA also. Vietnam vet; Agent Orange exposure. He was a neat guy and a great storyteller. Lies for days.
But again, that is *government run healthcare*, not *single payer healthcare*.
Single payer just means that instead of having private insurance companies that pool risk to lower the overall risk to each person thegovernment takes that role so that risk of financial ruin due to healthcare expenses is spread across the entire population and doesn't destroy individuals.
That is how insurance is supposed to work. You pay a premium to protect yourself from an overwhelming loss.
If you have private health insurance of some kind then *you are already paying for the drinkers, the druggies, and the fat asses*. Because that is how insurance works. You are sharing risk with all the other enrollees.
It is just that with private health insurance you are paying for the fatties + also paying some extra on top of that to create a profit for the insurance company.
I don't understand why this concept appears to be difficult for some people to grasp.
In the UK they don't have single payer [essentially the government acts as the insurer and pays the bills] they have government operated healthcare [the government owns and runs the facilities; pays the the healthcare workers].
Then above that they have also starved their health system of funding relative to spending in other EU countries.
^^^
Obviously dated but compare per person spending:
US: $10,000+ per person per year
Switzerland: $7,000+ per person per year
Sweden + Germany: roughly $6,000 per person per year
UK: Less than $4,000 per person per year
The pronoun/trans thing is an infection with a mental virus which isn't restricted to the UK.
*Notice the US spending more per person per year in public spending [Medicaid/CHIPs/Medicare/VA/Etc.] than UK spent in total per person.*
I'm sorry that your father has had a bad experience with the VA. My ex husband's uncle had a terrible time with the VA also. Vietnam vet; Agent Orange exposure. He was a neat guy and a great storyteller. Lies for days.
But again, that is *government run healthcare*, not *single payer healthcare*.
Single payer just means that instead of having private insurance companies that pool risk to lower the overall risk to each person thegovernment takes that role so that risk of financial ruin due to healthcare expenses is spread across the entire population and doesn't destroy individuals.
That is how insurance is supposed to work. You pay a premium to protect yourself from an overwhelming loss.
If you have private health insurance of some kind then *you are already paying for the drinkers, the druggies, and the fat asses*. Because that is how insurance works. You are sharing risk with all the other enrollees.
It is just that with private health insurance you are paying for the fatties + also paying some extra on top of that to create a profit for the insurance company.
I don't understand why this concept appears to be difficult for some people to grasp.
In Hoots We Trust.
09-16-2022, 11:53 AM
-
#59
- rentfreein
- Banned
-
- rentfreein
- Banned
- Join Date: Aug 2022
- Age: 56
- Posts: 4,814
- Rep Power: 0
-
-
Originally Posted By isingmodel⏩
Yeah. Over 50% of Americans on the dole is a great sign. I'm sure all those people need it. Yang gang.lolPanhandling to cover medical bills is a sure sign of a stable, functioning society
09-16-2022, 12:24 PM
-
#60
- jackamo2887
- BEATINGU
-
- jackamo2887
- BEATINGU
- Join Date: Oct 2007
- Posts: 29,617
- Rep Power: 146835
-
-
I feel like universal Healthcare would work great if we implemented intense stipulations.
Mandatory exercise every week
If you smoke, no universal Healthcare for you
Mandatory drug tests so if you're a ****in heroin user, you lose your Healthcare.
If you're grossly obese, no Healthcare for you.
Raise the cost of alcohol significantly and use the extra taxes for the Healthcare system
Every single government funded welfare program should come with a mandatory weekly drug test.
Give people actual incentives to be healthy.
Mandatory exercise every week
If you smoke, no universal Healthcare for you
Mandatory drug tests so if you're a ****in heroin user, you lose your Healthcare.
If you're grossly obese, no Healthcare for you.
Raise the cost of alcohol significantly and use the extra taxes for the Healthcare system
Every single government funded welfare program should come with a mandatory weekly drug test.
Give people actual incentives to be healthy.
Survival. When the jungle tears itself down and builds itself into something new. Guys like you and me, we end up dead. Doesn’t really mean anything. Or, if we happen to live through it, well that doesn’t mean anything either.
Bookmarks
-
- Digg
-
- del.icio.us
-
- StumbleUpon
-
-
Posting Permissions
- You may not post new threads
- You may not post replies
- You may not post attachments
- You may not edit your posts