Menewsha Avatar Community

Menewsha Avatar Community (https://www.menewsha.com/forum/index.php)
-   Extended Discussion (https://www.menewsha.com/forum/forumdisplay.php?f=111)
-   -   "Medicare For All" (https://www.menewsha.com/forum/showthread.php?t=219897)

salvete 02-12-2017 07:42 AM

"Medicare For All"
 
What are your thoughts on having a single-payer national health insurance, also known as "Medicare for all?"

What are the pros and cons of such a system?

jupiter 02-12-2017 10:26 AM

I'm a fan of a not-for-profit healthcare system.
I suppose the only con I could imagine at this moment is the burden it would place on the government, but I'm sure some temporary adjustments and adaptations would make an easy transition. In the long run, it would be cheaper for the customer (a.k.a. the patient) because there wouldn't be premiums and "out of network" costs, and for the provider, who doesn't have to suffer adjustments from contracts with different health insurers. It would be really nice to be able to choose which hospital you go to in the event of an emergency, but sometimes shit happens and a patient shouldn't be penalized or be forced to deal with paperwork and insurance in such an event.

I don't know about other states, but we already have one form of 'universal' healthcare for Natives. All healthcare is fronted by the state. I'm envious, but not upset about it being provided.

2Femme 02-12-2017 05:37 PM

I'm from Canada and all I have to say is health care should be free, and everyone should have equal access to health care.

Yes - there are obviously issues... But I'd rather advocate for those issues to be fixed then have a system where not everyone can afford to receive health care.

I recently graduated so was no longer eligible under my moms coverage. Luckily due so some loophole I still have temporary coverage. But my point is.... I could not imagine having to pay out of pocket for medication, medical services, or insurance.

Mr. Wrong 02-12-2017 10:28 PM

One of the first complaints I hear when debating God and the bible is that the non-believer will say that religion is for "control". But that is precisely what government run healthcare is. Whomever controls your healthcare controls you.

Should healthcare be free? Absolutely. Yes. Unfortunately, the reality is very different. Everything has a cost. There is no bypassing that fundamental fact. Otherwise why wouldn't housing, food, clothing, everything else we need be free? Stuff has to be paid for.

What should be allowed to happen is have insurance companies from across the nation being allowed to compete nationwide. Obummercare didn't allow that because the government plan would be voted off the competition island in a very short amount of time. And competing healthcare insurer's wouldn't force you to pay for ridiculous things that you neither need nor want.

With socialized medicine, you'll entually run out of money and healthcare in the United States will become like what is in Cuba.

jupiter 02-12-2017 11:31 PM

Government-sponsored healthcare doesn't dictate when and where a patient goes for treatment. With a single entity providing the payment and distribution of healthcare (i.e. physicians become government 'employees' regardless of whether they work from a hospital or from their own private specialized practice) an injured person may choose freely where they go for treatment without having to factor cost into a limit of where they go. Unlike how healthcare is treated today, or even prior to the Affordable Care Act; insurance companies will dictate where you're able to go because they simply won't pay for you to go to a particular hospital or to a particular specialist if they don't feel it's "medically necessary" or out of their network.

Before the Affordable Care Act, or Obamacare as it's commonly known, insurance companies were allowed to 'compete' and it resulted in an outstanding amount of people who couldn't afford the premiums, or didn't realize that all the money they had been paying each month to a plan didn't actually cover them when they were sick. Women suffered quite a bit with this system, considering how an insurance company would determine that a pap smear counted as a pre-existing condition and excused them from paying for basic checkups.

The United States already has multiple forms of healthcare, including socialized; medicare and medicaid are two of the most common programs. For one, getting rid of these programs that service federally recognized tribes, and group members by age or risk, would create a--albeit small--fund for healthcare. It's not actually free, and countries with a socialized system still pay for it through taxes or use a two-tier system, or some form of hybrid that still provides a sense of socialized medicine. Norway, France, Iceland, Japan, Canada, Sweden are just a few examples of countries with an impressive economy and socialized healthcare.

The U.S. already has plenty of socialized services; fire, police, a road system. When you call for help, they don't immediately ask you how much you paid that month for police and then hang up when you wonder why that would matter.

So no, socialized medicine won't make the United States into Cuba.
And in final, socialized services are not what drove Cuba into poverty, despite what Rush Limbaugh, or Fox News, or wherever the fuck you get your opinions from has been telling you.

Mr. Wrong 02-13-2017 03:25 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jupiter (Post 1773847455)
Government-sponsored healthcare doesn't dictate when and where a patient goes for treatment. With a single entity providing the payment and distribution of healthcare (i.e. physicians become government 'employees' regardless of whether they work from a hospital or from their own private specialized practice) an injured person may choose freely where they go for treatment without having to factor cost into a limit of where they go. Unlike how healthcare is treated today, or even prior to the Affordable Care Act; insurance companies will dictate where you're able to go because they simply won't pay for you to go to a particular hospital or to a particular specialist if they don't feel it's "medically necessary" or out of their network.

Before the Affordable Care Act, or Obamacare as it's commonly known, insurance companies were allowed to 'compete' and it resulted in an outstanding amount of people who couldn't afford the premiums, or didn't realize that all the money they had been paying each month to a plan didn't actually cover them when they were sick. Women suffered quite a bit with this system, considering how an insurance company would determine that a pap smear counted as a pre-existing condition and excused them from paying for basic checkups.

The United States already has multiple forms of healthcare, including socialized; medicare and medicaid are two of the most common programs. For one, getting rid of these programs that service federally recognized tribes, and group members by age or risk, would create a--albeit small--fund for healthcare. It's not actually free, and countries with a socialized system still pay for it through taxes or use a two-tier system, or some form of hybrid that still provides a sense of socialized medicine. Norway, France, Iceland, Japan, Canada, Sweden are just a few examples of countries with an impressive economy and socialized healthcare.

The U.S. already has plenty of socialized services; fire, police, a road system. When you call for help, they don't immediately ask you how much you paid that month for police and then hang up when you wonder why that would matter.

So no, socialized medicine won't make the United States into Cuba.
And in final, socialized services are not what drove Cuba into poverty, despite what Rush Limbaugh, or Fox News, or wherever the fuck you get your opinions from has been telling you.

One fine day, I am going to venture to New York City and take a tour of Fox News studios and meet my hero, Tucker Carlson. It'll be a bromance made in Heaven.

2Femme 02-13-2017 04:18 PM

Canada's health care is technically socialized. We're doing fine. A socialized medicine isn't a dirty word - it just means the provision of medical and hospital care for everyone covered by government(tax) funds.

And by free healthcare, I mean it should be at no cost to individuals. As someone in the healthcare field, I've always found it abhorrent how healthcare in the states is for-profit.

And I do believe housing, food, and basic necessities should be 'free' as well - essentially basic income, but that's another discussion.

Mr. Wrong 02-13-2017 08:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 2Femme (Post 1773848911)
Canada's health care is technically socialized. We're doing fine. A socialized medicine isn't a dirty word - it just means the provision of medical and hospital care for everyone covered by government(tax) funds.

And by free healthcare, I mean it should be at no cost to individuals. As someone in the healthcare field, I've always found it abhorrent how healthcare in the states is for-profit.

And I do believe housing, food, and basic necessities should be 'free' as well - essentially basic income, but that's another discussion.

But healthcare does come at a cost for individuals through high taxes.

Nothing is produced without cost. It has to be paid for whether it is goods or services. The government has to get its money from somewhere.

Nephila 05-07-2017 06:21 PM

The portion of our taxes that goes to fund health care is very low. Only .11 from every tax dollar (give or take a few cents depending on who gets in)

While it's true that nothing is produced without cost, the cost in Canada's case isn't nearly as phenomenal as it would be in America's case. We did't let the drug companies set the price for life saving drugs up here. There are laws to protect people from that BS. Most of what's spent from our tax dollars goes to research/keeping the facilities open. As it should.

Pills cost so little to make now. If you have the supplies and knowledge to cure someones illness why wouldn't you. Why let companies charge $1000 for something that costs $2 to make. It's sickening how bad drug companies have become for you guys down there and my heart goes out to all those with families to support in the US that get sick.

Not saying we're perfect up here when it comes to health care, but it IS a better system than letting people die because "they're poor"

Heck at $1000 per pill who wouldn't be poor after a 6 month treatment regimen. $180K is not within a lot of families yearly budget let alone in a 6 month period. Making it that high is in affect killing people OR Enslaving them to that debt.

Whether the companies mean to kill or not doesn't let them off the hook. Murder by negligence is still a thing. Which is illegal last time I checked. Hence why companies can't charge that much for pills here.

With how much you guys love to sue down there it's mind boggling that these laws haven't been acted upon. After all corporations are people now. So if they mass murder a bunch of people via the negligence of greed they need to be held accountable.

hummy 05-07-2017 06:24 PM


my head hurts

Mr. Wrong 05-08-2017 04:42 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by hummy (Post 1773902957)

my head hurts

Take two of these and call me in the morning.

TheEmpressofEvil 05-08-2017 10:10 AM

There's so much backlash with how tax is spent in the US. It's really comical how much misconception there is. Everyone pays "their share" which is a percentage based on their income. What people seem to believe is that the money they spend in taxes will be less if we end "paying for others." When the reality is, it won't be. You're paying it, the same amount, regardless of any cuts to any program. They only thing that changes is how the government chooses to allocate those funds. It's the same as companies that prepare an annual budget Every division gets their same amount, the same as last year, and they have to figure out what to cut and what to keep but it MUST equal that same amount as last year.

I'd rather the contribution I have to make is spent on caring for people that aren't as lucky as me and need help paying for insurance than for bombs that really did nothing or glorified fences. I've never quite understood the apprehension in helping others. I've also never understood the level of misinformation and people that seem to truly believe they will not be adversely affected if protections are removed. It could be your state will still enforce protections and bar insurances for discriminating against individuals with certain preexisting conditions, or even just for being a woman, but what if it doesn't? I'd rather everyone be protected against the BS that could happen or the hike in premiums just for being born a female or not cis and therefore needing lifelong HRT.

I'm lucky I have a job that pays for my insurance and my coverages will ultimately not be affected because my state but I know so many others that are right in the crosshairs of everything going on.

The funny thing with lawsuits is that we protect companies more than people. If you ever get the chance, watch Hot Coffee. It's on netflix still, I think. It will likely change your mind about how much "we like to sue." Everything is marketing, and everyone should understand companies will spin "sue happy citizens" if it means protecting their bottom line.

The Wandering Poet 05-11-2017 02:05 PM

Okay so I go to work soon so I can't flush out a huge reply, but I work in the medical field.

There are 2 primary issues here. One, doctors prescribe drugs like candy. most of the time they do not know if the drug will help you, and often will prescribe the wrong drug for you. The there are the side effects which you need more drugs for and it's a vicious cycle.
Two, because of who is in office, people aren't able to touch them. Like Hillary for example, quite clearly was involved in criminal activity, but yet she walks free because she's rich (now imagine a drug company, also rich). Drug companies are rich and they are supported by the government.

monstahh` 05-18-2017 10:03 AM

Health services should be included in our taxes and EVERYONE should be included.
And it should be taxed on a scale. People who make the least pay the least, people who make the most pay the most.
Another way to describe insurance is a "health pool" everyone contributes so that everyone else can also be healthy.

The Wandering Poet 05-18-2017 01:53 PM

Biggest issue though is that people like my parents always say "I don't care about your health, I just care about mine and my families"
The majority would vote it into oblivion until they needed it.

monstahh` 05-18-2017 02:00 PM

Which is extremely sad.
Some of my family members don't have insurance and its very stressful for them. My mom needs a bunch of tests run but she can't afford them. She might be dying.
And because my brother couldn't afford medical/mental care, he committed suicide.

Its just heartbreaking.

The Wandering Poet 05-18-2017 06:50 PM

It is... you have to be mentally retarded (medically speaking) before the government cares enough about your health to make it work.

It's pretty stupid. So often at work even we struggle to get a patient their medication because insurances fuss and whine about the price.

monstahh` 05-18-2017 08:42 PM

I've had to sue insurance companies because they refused to pay for medication that specifically said it was covered, that my doctor filed paperwork for to prior-auth, etc.
It was a nightmare. :<

The whole healthcare system is busted. They don't have enough money (spent on staff/equipment) and I know of multiple doctors that have stopped accepting insurance from certain companies because they owe them (the doctor) upwards of $100,000.

The Wandering Poet 05-19-2017 12:48 AM

Only $100,000? Company I work for sued the government for millions of unpaid obama care medications.

Obama care itself caused the shut down of a ton of small businesses.


All times are GMT. The time now is 01:41 PM.