U.S. Politics

[Badger]

Can't wait for 8 years of "it's because she's a woman."

[Tommy]

I'm not necessarily against single payer for basic insurance if it were practical, but it's not. Look at our budget. We already pay way more per capita in terms of tax dollars for Medicare/Medicaid than Canadian citizens pay for their universal healthcare. Something ain't right.

There's a lot of things wrong with the insurance system, and I think Obamacare was definitely not the way to go about it. Creating more taxes and another bureaucracy isn't solving the problem. It's actually a step in the entirely wrong direction.

[Johnny English]

The whole concept of healthcare delivery as a profit-driven industry is utterly fucked, but free market obsessives can't or won't understand that.

[Tommy]

Can't wait for 8 years of "it's because she's a woman."

Of course that's what the news will focus on. CNN or some other stupid news site will go on twitter and search for "female president" and pick out any dumb tweets from idiots saying things like "Yo I don't want a female president lolz" and then post an article entitled "America isn't ready for a female president. Look at these tweets!!"

[Tommy]

The whole concept of healthcare delivery as a profit-driven industry is utterly fucked, but free market obsessives can't or won't understand that.

Fine, but don't expect pharma companies to spend billions in R&D for new drug developments. You can't have both. It's either "free basic healthcare for everyone and substandard drugs" or "premium healthcare for most people, free emergency care for all people, and awesome life-saving drugs for everyone at a cost."

I'm sure there's a happy medium, but we'd essentially have to destroy the framework of the healthcare industry and rebuild from scratch.

[Johnny English]

Fine, but don't expect pharma companies to spend billions in R&D for new drug developments. You can't have both. It's either "free basic healthcare for everyone and substandard drugs" or "premium healthcare for most people, free emergency care for all people, and awesome life-saving drugs for everyone at a cost."

I'm sure there's a happy medium, but we'd essentially have to destroy the framework of the healthcare industry and rebuild from scratch.

Hence my specific and careful use of the term "healthcare delivery", but I do understand the difficult reality of moving away from a private, profit-oriented point of care system. Doesn't mean it shouldn't happen, but it's virtually impossible in an environment where politics is owned by those most willing and capable of buying influence, so without proper overhaul of campaign finance rules it's kind of an irrelevant conversation.

[Badger]

Hence my specific and careful use of the term "healthcare delivery", but I do understand the difficult reality of moving away from a private, profit-oriented point of care system. Doesn't mean it shouldn't happen, but it's virtually impossible in an environment where politics is owned by those most willing and capable of buying influence, so without proper overhaul of campaign finance rules it's kind of an irrelevant conversation.

My problem with the current situation is that they haven't really moved away from that profit-oriented system at all. They just took a excrement structure and wrapped some duct tape around it.

[Fenwyr]

My problem with the current situation is that they haven't really moved away from that profit-oriented system at all. They just took a excrement structure and wrapped some duct tape around it.

I agree with this for the most part.  At the end of the day, thanks to the mandate, we will be saving a ton of cash because insurance companies will be eating the costs of folks that were previously uninsured.

Also, the pharm argument doesn't hold water in a single payer system.  The massive amount of tax dollars saved would likely go to R&D funding anyway.

[dcm1602]

My problem with the current situation is that they haven't really moved away from that profit-oriented system at all. They just took a excrement structure and wrapped some duct tape around it.

Nobody accepts this garbage derriere insurance either.

Especially as far as surgeons go its nuts. Nobody wants to touch the excrement off the exchange. I know out on long Island a ton of the hospitals won't accept the aca crap  at all. Even Stony Brook long islands largest state hospital won't have anything to do with it

[dcm1602]

I agree with this for the most part.  At the end of the day, thanks to the mandate, we will be saving a ton of cash because insurance companies will be eating the costs of folks that were previously uninsured.

Also, the pharm argument doesn't hold water in a single payer system.  The massive amount of tax dollars saved would likely go to R&D funding anyway.

And where do you think those costs the insurance companies are eating will go? They're gonna just spread the cost down to the user.

Which is why they're restricting benefits, strictly limiting access to care by only negotiating with limited numbers of providers. These plans have huge deductibles many are high deductible plans (you need to pay like the first 5-6 grand before the insurance kicks in). And then they bundle together services that the user wouldn't want or need.

Everything's a mess, and as a result were going to see a wild transformation in healthcare in the very near future. People are going to get treated over the Internet by some doctor in India, insurance companies will be managing your health (not just your insurance)

Massive change is coming, and I don't think it'll be for the better

Also big pharma wouldn't save excrement. In a single payer system the govt can grab companies by the balls controlling prices and what not. So big pharma would lose wild amounts of cash not save it

[AlioTheFool]

The entire ACA is a mess. I'm not pro-one-payer, but even that would have been better than the slapdick "solution" the government came up with. What we needed was healthcare reform. Instead we got a system that is more expensive and covers less for the majority who already had some form of healthcare.

The idea that the HMOs would absorb any cost is utterly ridiculous. Anyone who pays any attention to corporate America already knew none of them would do anything less than pass the new costs down to the customer.

[Badger]

The entire ACA is a mess. I'm not pro-one-payer, but even that would have been better than the slapdick "solution" the government came up with. What we needed was healthcare reform. Instead we got a system that is more expensive and covers less for the majority who already had some form of healthcare.

The idea that the HMOs would absorb any cost is utterly ridiculous. Anyone who pays any attention to corporate America already knew none of them would do anything less than pass the new costs down to the customer.

This American Life did a great 2-part episode about the history and problems of our healthcare system. It was really interesting, they did a great job of laying out how things got to where they are, and how all three sides (patients, doctors, insurers) contributed to freaking it up.

[ons]

This American Life

Didn't you hear? NPR = biased liberal bullshit.

[Badger]

Didn't you hear? NPR = biased liberal bullshit.

I know you're joking, but they made a complete overhaul seem like the best/only way to fix the system and didn't plug ACA or anything (this was a few years before that anyway).

There was supposed to be a second half to my post about all that but I didn't feel like writing it up.

[AlioTheFool]

I know you're joking, but they made a complete overhaul seem like the best/only way to fix the system and didn't plug ACA or anything (this was a few years before that anyway).

There was supposed to be a second half to my post about all that but I didn't feel like writing it up.

It is. Top to bottom, the entire system is flawed. And not because it's a profit-based system.