87 million uninsured, 30 thousand dying a year, 500 thousand going bankrupt. Time for a change to a broken system.

This_person

Well-Known Member
Even if you saved more money overall. The tax you pay vs the price you pay for private insurance?
That's what Bird Dog meant by "higher" health care. The health care we get is FAR better by it being on the capitalist market, free market, than it would be if it were taxpayer provided. The government makes EVERY single thing it runs worse, less efficient, and more costly.

As someone in the VA health care system if it is better than they could get outside in the free market. Ask yourself why the English have such horrific teeth. Ask anyone in Canada what their tax rate is. It is not less expensive to have government run it, and it is worse in the long run.

Now, ask yourself why any pharmaceutical company would do the R&D for new life saving drugs if there was no profit in it. By eliminating profit, you eliminate the desire to find the new solutions. That's not just at the corporate level - individuals in those companies make money, too. Why would they do the research? What would be the reason to do that work?

So, not only would you end up with worse health care, you'd end up with fewer new solutions to problems.

Now, ask yourself where you get better care; is it at the very expensive private hospitals, or the public hospitals? Knowing the answer is the private hospitals, ask yourself why someone would spend 8 years in school, followed by residency, etc., to get the same pay they'd get if they were an Army doctor (you know what they call the folks who get D's in medical school? They call them "Doctor", but it's almost always "LT" in there somewhere, too).

Every aspect of it is bad. You lose freedom. You lose more money. You lose quality of care. You lose competent doctors. You lose innovation into new techniques or drugs. You gain unnecessary bureaucracy, cost, and restrictions. You gain time between finding a medical issue and getting a solution.
 

Burnthings

Active Member
That's what Bird Dog meant by "higher" health care. The health care we get is FAR better by it being on the capitalist market, free market, than it would be if it were taxpayer provided. The government makes EVERY single thing it runs worse, less efficient, and more costly.

As someone in the VA health care system if it is better than they could get outside in the free market. Ask yourself why the English have such horrific teeth. Ask anyone in Canada what their tax rate is. It is not less expensive to have government run it, and it is worse in the long run.

Now, ask yourself why any pharmaceutical company would do the R&D for new life saving drugs if there was no profit in it. By eliminating profit, you eliminate the desire to find the new solutions. That's not just at the corporate level - individuals in those companies make money, too. Why would they do the research? What would be the reason to do that work?

So, not only would you end up with worse health care, you'd end up with fewer new solutions to problems.

Now, ask yourself where you get better care; is it at the very expensive private hospitals, or the public hospitals? Knowing the answer is the private hospitals, ask yourself why someone would spend 8 years in school, followed by residency, etc., to get the same pay they'd get if they were an Army doctor (you know what they call the folks who get D's in medical school? They call them "Doctor", but it's almost always "LT" in there somewhere, too).

Every aspect of it is bad. You lose freedom. You lose more money. You lose quality of care. You lose competent doctors. You lose innovation into new techniques or drugs. You gain unnecessary bureaucracy, cost, and restrictions. You gain time between finding a medical issue and getting a solution.
If this is true why do other developed countries on single payer receive better care while paying less, while having everyone covered.
 

This_person

Well-Known Member
If this is true why do other developed countries on single payer receive better care while paying less, while having everyone covered.
Well, I said a lot of things so I don't know which you mean by "this" (in "if this is true").

As a general rule, they do not get better care. They use American-created drugs in American-created procedures following American-created guidelines. Absent those (which, if we were socialist in our health care, WE would be absent those things, too), the comparison for American health care includes those great hospitals, the average hospitals, and the inner-city crapholes. If one is willing to pay for decent health care here, one gets it. If one wants taxpayers to pay for it (Medicaid, or following the "if you can't afford it you get it anyway" laws for public hospitals), then the care really sucks.

A generic chart like you posted shows no metrics by which the standards were ranked, or sources of information.
 

luvmygdaughters

Well-Known Member
PREMO Member
If this is true why do other developed countries on single payer receive better care while paying less, while having everyone covered.
I have a step daughter in law who lives in England...she would strongly disagree with you. While she was living in the USA, she was amazed at how quickly she could get doctor and dentist appointments as well as pediatrician appointments for her daughter.
 

Gilligan

#*! boat!
PREMO Member
I have a step daughter in law who lives in England...she would strongly disagree with you. While she was living in the USA, she was amazed at how quickly she could get doctor and dentist appointments as well as pediatrician appointments for her daughter.
I've lived in, and have family in, Norway. Crazy wait times for many types of medical/health services. Chronic shortage of healthcare professionals too, since the gummint regulated delivery system keeps wages low. Folks like Buttthings have no clue..never been out of the basement.
 

LightRoasted

If I may ...
If I may ...

That's not how it works, everyone has to be in. Collective bargaining power. That's how countries like Canada are able to negotiate such low prices for drugs.
Well, ya see now? We are a representative Republic, where the elected government gets its authority from the consent of the governed. And since education in this Nation is for crap now, what there is, is a whole bunch of 'implied consent' going on. 'Implied', because people are uneducated, and unwilling, or too scared, to stand up, en mass, to their elected representatives, and say 'No Effing Way Asshats!' So they just go along to get along making it seem that it is the majority's wishful informed consent to go along with the healthcare BS. When in actuality it is the well informed non-consenting majority that are standing up and making arguments against the BS. But the MSM only runs with the 'implied consent' ignorantes opinions to give the appearance of true consent allowing government to go where it has no business going.
 

glhs837

Power with Control
View attachment 141693

I'd do a bit more research into that resource.

Seems they were funded by Philip-Morris and Koch.

They would have a vested interest in swaying policy.

I know your buddy is anecdotal evidence but you should ask him if would switch to American style healthcare.

Post up your facts. Like rebuttals that show the study to be false. Attacking the source seems like a cheap way to not have to refute the facts.
 

black dog

Free America
Where is the liberty when you are tied to a job for health insurance. Where is the liberty in being raked over the coals by crazy premiums. Where is the liberty in watching children die because care is cutting into some CEOs profit margins.
You should move north to Canada or across the big pond to a European country that more suits your beliefs.
That would be a Win-Win, one for you and the other is the USA Taxpayer. Actually anywhere that doesn't have a Constitution would work well for you.
 

PsyOps

Pixelated
Works for every other first world country and we end up spending more for less care.
Well damn... why do you stay in this wretched, screwed up country? Why isn't everyone flocking to France, Switzerland, or Canada? More people immigrate to this country than any other.

I get a little fed up with people saying "other first world country..." :blahblah: These countries don't have a constitution like we do, that protects our rights in the manner that it does. It prevents government from ruling over us and stripping our rights while at the same time, forcing us to buy what we don't want, and banning what we do want. I don't want government controlling 1/6th of our economy. That's too much power in their hands. What they hold power to, they determine how, why, when, and if you get it. That may be fine in other countries, because they don't have a constitution that limits their government like ours does.

If you feel you are too free to make your own choices, by all means go where you are less free and the government gives it to you for "free".
 
Top