Any intelligent thoughts on the issue? It doesn't matter to me what side you are coming from, but please support your statements with logic and reasoning.

These are currently some scenarios that I have been brainstorming (See A and B below), but please feel free to further elaborate upon these, or suggest alternate perspectives.

A. Will a single payer system be developed-- and if so-- will this actually be the most efficient form of healthcare, or will the quality of healthcare be drastically undermined?

OR

B. Will today's problems escalate into the future? And by that, I mean nowadays, some patients have no insurance, while other times what they have is inadequate. Increasingly, there is an issue with public vs private insurance, because public insurance only pays for certain things, while private insurance is more generous re/ paying for preventive screenings, childhood immunizations and well-baby care.



So...whatcha think?

you are new to the forums I see

It would be better if you put your message into one of the giant threadzillas on this topic

Single-payer equaling most efficient form of healthcare is ABSOLUTELY out of the question.

Corey Haim still has a better chance of turning his life around then the United States government being able to run an efficient single-payer form of healthcare.

This really doesn't take any intelligent thought, just look at the medicaid disaster (or anything else the government meddles in) and you got your answer.

"sex/ journeyman"

can you please elaborate on what makes a single-payer system so inefficient? do you think this will undermine the quality of healthcare? how? i know you mentioned the medicaid disaster, but could you elaborate? thanks.

Something will pass. It will not fix the problem.

do you believe in profits and prices as a way of regulating production to match consumer preferences?

Many in this forum hold something close to that as a fundamental tenet of economics.

OP-

This about sums it up...

http://www.balancedpolitics.org/univ...ealth_care.htm

As you'll see... universal healthcare wouldn't be a complete catastrophe... it would just be a giant disaster

Right now 17% (1 out of every 6 dollars) of the Federal budget goes to healthcare. Like Warren Buffet said, at this rate, we will be spending 30% on health care by 2015. No way can this country support the status quo. Something needs to be done!!! As per Buffet, it "...is really like a tapeworm eating, you know, at our economic body...".

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0310/33693.html

This also came up in a conversation in the life thread.

In your opinion, what is it that makes the US government too incompetent to implement an efficient single-payer form of health care, but other governments around the world can implement some really good healthcare programs? What, in your opinion, is so special about the US government compared to other governments.

I have my opinion on the matter, I'd be interested to read yours.

Ok this isn't very difficult...

Lets take....................hmmm.... ITALY - I am sure their healthcare program works relatively well there. I believe they are in the top 5 of overall healthcare in the world from a stat that I saw.

Geez how could that be? I mean the United States is a global leader in just about everything... yet Italy has a better overall healthcare system by a little over the USA? I mean what do Italians even do besides relax, look at the beautiful countryside, and play soccer?

hmmm let me think.... OH YA! Italy's population is actually HEALTHY! And not full of fat slobs like we have here in the United States. Hmmm what else? There must be something else.... hmmmm Oh ya! Italy has a population of only 60 million...1/6th the size of the USA. Demographics are very important. America isn't the same as Italy or anywhere else. What works in Italy will not work in the USA.

Do you think there would be a healthcare crisis in the United States if everyone here ran 30 minutes 5 days a week and ate healthy 80% of the time? Obviously not.

I am guessing you do not live in the United States, because other then the military, the U.S. government can't run ****.

I'm being sarcastic, but I am not trying to be a dick about it... just trying to get my point across. There are too many people here most of which are already unhealthy for the government to make healthcare work as efficiently as say somewhere in europe...and even then 75% of the people here are happy with their private coverage, and we have the highest quality healthcare in the world. People come here from all over the world to get healthcare.

Thousands of Canadiens cross the border to come to the USA for healthcare every year... now WHY on earth would someone living in canada come to the U.S. to pay for healthcare when it is free in their own country???? BECAUSE... their healthcare sucks!

Higher taxes for sure.

Welcome to the forums. For what it's worth, you can just call me Carpal\'Tunnel. Don't be confused with the impostors, I'm the real one.

hard to say it better than sexual journeyman, who underlined the key points of life:

1) governments are incompetent and are in the business of confusing and swindling the people they're supposed to represent.

2) health care is the individual's personal responsibility, not the state's. If you are not able to believe this, there is a very good chance you will pay a steep punishment for being taken care of.

How to be responsible:

1) Eat well. Replace fast foods with raw food, sodas with water or raw juice made at home. The Italians don't even eat that great but they consume a lot of raw local produce and their water is pure.

2) Sleep well and avoid stress.
3) Exercise at least somewhat. Walk or ride a bike somewhere nearby instead of driving all the time.

But most importantly, stop consenting to whatever the government wants to pass. Grown men are not supposed to fall for the same swindle dozens of times.

we can hit on each other here?

What do people make of the argument that if we require insurance companies to put on people who have pre- existing conditions, what would compel someone to get insurance before they need it? And if we made it a requirement, how are we going to enforce 320 some million people having health insurance?
Not trying to make a point just wondering responses.

Simple question for the OP:

How does reducing the cost of health insurance affect the overall cost of health care?

you can't. there's a reason its called insurance and not healthcare-discount-freepony-coupon, its supposed to make things cheaper IN CASE something bad happens, not after something bad has already happened.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adverse_selection

theoretically, that is the reason why single payer health care is more efficient, it removes the adverse selection problem if everyone has the same insurance and is forced to pay it. theoretically this will keep costs lower than letting healthy people choose not to buy any insurance. of course some of us think its incredibly amoral and would be effected in a particularly inefficient manner and don't really care if it would help other people's health care costs.

i personally haven't seen a single breakdown of what actually costs how much as far as health care goes. how are we supposed to figure out what hte problem is if we can't even have a rational debate about what in particular causes high costs. is it monopolistic practices of pharm companies aided by the FDA? are insurance companies gouging? is it simply that consumers don't have the information they need or the ability to choose their doctor based on price, meaning the market isn't competitive (leading to monopolistic competition and higher prices)? i've never seen a price list at a doctors office, and i guess if you are insured you probably don't care as long as the doc is a provider. maybe the confliciting incentives we have here makes the market more inefficient?

maybe they are talking about this stuff in congress but i haven't seen a real breakdown or an actual rational debate anywhere in MSM.

Post Office is a good example of why we should be terrified of government healthcare. The post office is broke because people prefer to use other means to send their stuff. On-line bill pay combined with paperless statements. FedEx and UPS for priority packages.

What is the government's plan to deal with their inability to compete? Demand taxpayer support, raise their prices and offer less services.

Costa Rica has single payer and private systems. Guess which one has lines and ****ty service. The other gets medical tourism.

Fat people are generally poor too. There is a reason why they are fat, i.e. they cannot resist instant gratification for long term gains. A sure recipe to be pathetic forever.

Yet spending on defense is higher. the USA needs a public system. Though many of those with insurance dont care about those that dont.

45,000 die a year due to no healthcare yet 3500 die in the trade center. Yet those 3500 seem to be more important than the 45,000

What a bull**** figure dude.

its funny that people realize how ****ed up our government is in some ways but think it would be all roses and sunshine for health care

Hate to break it to you, but most on this forum also advocate a drastic deduction in military spending, so your statement is meaningless

Why should I care about some alcoholic or drug addict who I don't even know who might die because of his gluttony? I don't give a ****. I'd rather spend the money I earn on my family, then give it to some heroin addict who might die.

Just out of curiosity, are you a Christian?