U.S. Politics

[Johnny English]

But having a government option  doesn't mean he wouldn't have the issue. The government would have to do the exact same excrement to contain costs.

That's not true.

Source: lifelong beneficiary of sweet government healthcare.

[Badger]

As someone with firsthand knowledge and experience in the administration of federal entitlement programs, they don't look for excuses not to pay benefits in order to save money, because it's not profit-driven.

[dcm1602]

As someone with firsthand knowledge and experience in the administration of federal entitlement programs, they don't look for excuses not to pay benefits in order to save money, because it's not profit-driven.

So you're saying the government doesn't operate within the confines of a budget?

[Tommy]

So you're saying the government doesn't operate within the confines of a budget?

I've sold to government institutions before. Their budget is set beforehand based on their current needs and a little extra for future needs (in my case it was research and info etc). They'll almost always choose the cheapest option so they have to have multiple provides submit quotes. On the other hand if they don't spend everything in their budget, it gets cut, so usually they're incentivized to spend every penny. I've had the dept of agriculture give me a number and say "what can we get for this?" It's funny actually but leads to waste.

Getting additional funds approved is a pain in the derriere. At least with private companies if you show them a reasonable ROI they'll appropriate it into their budget for the next year. With governments it's a beaurocratic nightmare.

[Tommy]

I'm all for basic healthcare being run by the government but we'd have to essentially get rid of obamacare, Medicare, and Medicaid, and essentially start over. And you can't force every practitioner to accept government health care, but the local GPs and specialized ones could. Basically it should be the cheapest option. Medication. aside from controlled substances, should also be included. Maybe limit it to the generic brands.

[Fenwyr]

I'm all for basic healthcare being run by the government but we'd have to essentially get rid of obamacare, Medicare, and Medicaid, and essentially start over. And you can't force every practitioner to accept government health care, but the local GPs and specialized ones could. Basically it should be the cheapest option. Medication. aside from controlled substances, should also be included. Maybe limit it to the generic brands.

I mostly agree with this.  We are going to have a single payer system in the not too distant future.  It's the only logical solution and is inevitable.  Everyone in DC just needs to put partisan bullshit aside and start working on the long term solution.

[Tommy]

I mostly agree with this.  We are going to have a single payer system in the not too distant future.  It's the only logical solution and is inevitable.  Everyone in DC just needs to put partisan bullshit aside and start working on the long term solution.

Exactly. We need to build from the ground up. Redo everything. Unfortunately that's not going to happen. We can do it without even raising taxes, but no one wants to talk about it. Single payer has become synonymous with "more taxes!" which is why most conservatives have been against it.

[ukilledkenny]

Exactly. We need to build from the ground up. Redo everything. Unfortunately that's not going to happen. We can do it without even raising taxes, but no one wants to talk about it. Single payer has become synonymous with "more taxes!" which is why most conservatives have been against it.

I could be totally wrong about this but my impression from people I actually talk to is that they truly hate the idea of anyone getting the same treatment as them that hasn't esrned it based on whatever metric they think is most important.

[Fenwyr]

Exactly. We need to build from the ground up. Redo everything. Unfortunately that's not going to happen. We can do it without even raising taxes, but no one wants to talk about it. Single payer has become synonymous with "more taxes!" which is why most conservatives have been against it.

The fact that someone like you and someone like me agree on this tells me otherwise.

[Fenwyr]

I could be totally wrong about this but my impression from people I actually talk to is that they truly hate the idea of anyone getting the same treatment as them that hasn't esrned it based on whatever metric they think is most important.

There will always be private practices to cater to douche bags like this.

[Tommy]

I could be totally wrong about this but my impression from people I actually talk to is that they truly hate the idea of anyone getting the same treatment as them that hasn't esrned it based on whatever metric they think is most important.

Well, there should still be levels of treatment. I don't agree that everyone deserves the same level of treatment, only that the bare minimum should be guaranteed. If I work my butt off and pay $400 a month for premium insurance then it should be premium. But if I want to just use the public option I could just opt out. There still needs to be an incentive to pay for premium care.

[Johnny English]

Well, there should still be levels of treatment. I don't agree that everyone deserves the same level of treatment, only that the bare minimum should be guaranteed. If I work my butt off and pay $400 a month for premium insurance then it should be premium. But if I want to just use the public option I could just opt out. There still needs to be an incentive to pay for premium care.

AKA the British system, or close to.

Health insurance should be optional. Healthcare should be available to everybody. I don't understand why so many people can't see that the cost of their healthcare would reduce significantly if it was free at the point of delivery with a government run single payer system. There are two reasons for this - no insurance comnpany taking profits from the administration of a basic human right, and people taking advantage of preventative healthcare and thus avoiding the really expensive, and far less expedient, reactive procedures.

There's nothing wrong with allowing people to also take private insurance and access private care, but that shouldn't be an alternative to them paying into the public system.

[dcm1602]

AKA the British system, or close to.

Health insurance should be optional. Healthcare should be available to everybody. I don't understand why so many people can't see that the cost of their healthcare would reduce significantly if it was free at the point of delivery with a government run single payer system. There are two reasons for this - no insurance comnpany taking profits from the administration of a basic human right, and people taking advantage of preventative healthcare and thus avoiding the really expensive, and far less expedient, reactive procedures.

There's nothing wrong with allowing people to also take private insurance and access private care, but that shouldn't be an alternative to them paying into the public system.

Well healthcare is "available" to everybody

And a big issue with government run healthcare is going to be getting healthcare providers. Theres already a shortage of providers in this country, when you start getting the government low-balling everybody you're going to have even more shortages, pull great minds out of the field, and hamper R&D.

How badly and significantly these things will happen nobody has a freaking clue. But if anyone pretends that there wont be significant negatives (along with positives) is a freaking moron.

Im not pretending to know the answer at all as i dont know excrement, other than its not as simple as people like to pretend

[Pope]

Well healthcare is "available" to everybody

And a big issue with government run healthcare is going to be getting healthcare providers. Theres already a shortage of providers in this country, when you start getting the government low-balling everybody you're going to have even more shortages, pull great minds out of the field, and hamper R&D.

How badly and significantly these things will happen nobody has a freaking clue. But if anyone pretends that there wont be significant negatives (along with positives) is a freaking moron.

Im not pretending to know the answer at all as i dont know excrement, other than its not as simple as people like to pretend

Clearly not biased

[dcm1602]

Clearly not biased

I was really referring more to doctors anesthesiologist and excrement like that. Having to go to school and take out loans for 8-12 years to get paid dick really isn't worth it. Same thing with PAs and stuff like that as well.

You're easily talking 200k+ in student loans, and that's on the low end of the spectrum. Plus not having a full time job until your mid to early 30s

Government getting involved makes all that stuff less attractive. Especially because not only will these people be making less, they're going to be getting taxed substantially more. Plus these people will be expected to see way more patients in way less time. These careers will certainly be less attractive

As far as the other parts of healthcare all its really going to do is make ratios work, and pass off the work of registered professionals to aids and techs and stuff.

No question asked a government run system cuts costs, but what it will do to quality and access to care (waiting time)  is a whole different story.