Started By
Message
locked post

Single payer healthcare will never happen in America: I have changed my mind

Posted on 5/24/17 at 12:48 pm
Posted by HailHailtoMichigan!
Mission Viejo, CA
Member since Mar 2012
69306 posts
Posted on 5/24/17 at 12:48 pm
I just don't see how a politician could survive an attempt to increase taxes by double digits on everyone to fund it. Sure, the people who use a lot of care would come out ahead. On the other hand, the majority of Americans who don't use medical care all that much will be worse off.

It's too disruptive. Not even new deal projects were as disruptive as single payer would be.

And it actually hurts people on medicaid, because as of right now, they are getting their care for free but are not paying any extra taxes. Under a single payer plan, they'd likely be paying extra in taxes for no additional benefit. Good luck with dealing with that, politically.

I used to think it would be possible and inevitable for it to happen here, but if liberal states can't get it done, why can the nation?

It would take YEARS to implement, and the party that puts it forward would likely lose in a huge landslide in the midterms, which would get rid of it.
This post was edited on 5/24/17 at 12:51 pm
Posted by bamarep
Member since Nov 2013
51806 posts
Posted on 5/24/17 at 12:49 pm to
Especially after it bankrupts California.
Posted by BamaAtl
South of North
Member since Dec 2009
21897 posts
Posted on 5/24/17 at 12:55 pm to
Medicare for All just might, though!

Posted by NC_Tigah
Carolinas
Member since Sep 2003
123942 posts
Posted on 5/24/17 at 12:57 pm to
quote:

Single payer healthcare will never happen in America
We really need it in California, just to see.
Posted by HailHailtoMichigan!
Mission Viejo, CA
Member since Mar 2012
69306 posts
Posted on 5/24/17 at 12:58 pm to
Here's left leaning-site politicususa with a decent article on why it will never happen:

quote:

For example, Britain has a relatively well-regarded universal healthcare system that every citizen pays for through national income tax. The tax rate for income tax and National Health Insurance in the United Kingdom (England) in 2015-16 for all citizens earning between zero and £31,785, considered basic-rate (flat rate) taxpayers, is a whopping 20 percent of their entire income. It is a full 15 percent more than America’s middle class tax rate and would entail a 20 percent tax hike for 45 percent of Americans who pay nothing now.

If a British citizen earns just one pence over that “basic threshold,” their income tax rate jumps to 40 percent up to £150,000. For income over that number the rate is 45 percent; all to cover the National Health plan administered solely by the government with a form of rationing.

For a comparison, and one reason why many Democrats are reticent to go all-in to support enactment of single-payer in America, in 2015, 45 percent of Americans with earned income paid zero income tax. One cannot comprehend how nearly half of the population living in poverty and barely making it and then saddled with a 20 percent tax bill will embrace being poorer to have basic healthcare when they will be unable to eat or pay rent.
Posted by Gr8t8s
Member since Oct 2009
2579 posts
Posted on 5/24/17 at 12:58 pm to
California is essentially budgeting $10,000 per person, per year for universal healthcare. Most expect the costs to be more than that. Even shitty health insurance under the ACA is less than that.
Posted by HailHailtoMichigan!
Mission Viejo, CA
Member since Mar 2012
69306 posts
Posted on 5/24/17 at 12:59 pm to
quote:

We really need it in California, just to see.


If it gets passed in ca and is an absolute disaster, I guarantee you BamaAtl will either flee the board or somehow argue it is working.
Posted by CamdenTiger
Member since Aug 2009
62444 posts
Posted on 5/24/17 at 12:59 pm to
Yeah, too many impediments here for that to happen, with costs being a major player...
Posted by Iosh
Bureau of Interstellar Immigration
Member since Dec 2012
18941 posts
Posted on 5/24/17 at 1:03 pm to
From what I understand the proposal being tabled in California is far more generous than most countries with single-payer. It has zero cost-sharing but covers inpatient, outpatient, emergency services, prescription drugs, dental, vision, nursing homes and long-term care, etc. Some of these are things that even Canada and Sweden don't have.
Posted by Jax-Tiger
Port Saint Lucie, FL
Member since Jan 2005
24751 posts
Posted on 5/24/17 at 1:04 pm to
quote:

I guarantee you BamaAtl will either flee the board, or somehow argue it is working, or figure out a way to blame the failure on Republicans.


FIFY
Posted by LSUcjb318
Member since Jul 2008
2364 posts
Posted on 5/24/17 at 1:05 pm to

Unless we start turning away poor sick people at hospitals, single payer is inevitable.

Taking care of poor sick people and keeping insurance companies profits high is just a large bubble waiting to pop.

We are the last civilized country domino to fall.
Posted by notsince98
KC, MO
Member since Oct 2012
18005 posts
Posted on 5/24/17 at 1:06 pm to
Has this already not been done in Mass. and failed miserably?
Posted by HailHailtoMichigan!
Mission Viejo, CA
Member since Mar 2012
69306 posts
Posted on 5/24/17 at 1:07 pm to
quote:

From what I understand the proposal being tabled in California is far more generous than most countries with single-payer. It has zero cost-sharing but covers inpatient, outpatient, emergency services, prescription drugs, dental, vision, nursing homes and long-term care, etc. Some of these are things that even Canada and Sweden don't have.
It's a dumpster fire plan, as it stands now.

There are zero copays, fees, etc for upfront medical use. That's radical. Even france and britain have patients pay small copays and fees,.

I would say probably 65%+ of people would be worse off in california under the plan.
Posted by Jax-Tiger
Port Saint Lucie, FL
Member since Jan 2005
24751 posts
Posted on 5/24/17 at 1:07 pm to
quote:

California is essentially budgeting $10,000 per person, per year for universal healthcare. Most expect the costs to be more than that.


Unless we allow the markets put downward pressure on the costs, it will almost certainly cost more.

That kind of money is like blood in the water for sharks. Everyone will be trying to figure out how to maximize their share of that money. Doctors, lawyers, insurance companies, pharmaceutical companies, medical device manufacturers, etc. The end result is that costs will go up.
Posted by HailHailtoMichigan!
Mission Viejo, CA
Member since Mar 2012
69306 posts
Posted on 5/24/17 at 1:08 pm to
quote:

Taking care of poor sick people and keeping insurance companies profits high is just a large bubble waiting to pop.
Insurance companies do not have high profits! It is more profitable in America to brew a beer than offer health insurance.
Posted by LSUcjb318
Member since Jul 2008
2364 posts
Posted on 5/24/17 at 1:12 pm to
quote:

Insurance companies do not have high profits


LINK

Here ya go sir.


quote:

In fact, UnitedHealth announced record-breaking profits in 2015, followed by an even better year this year. In July 2016, UnitedHealth celebrated revenues that quarter totalling $46.5 billion, an increase of $10 billion since the same time last year. And company filings show that UnitedHealth’s CEO Stephen J. Hemsley made over $20 million in 2015. To be fair, that is a pay cut. The previous year, in 2014, Hemsley took home $66 million in compensation.


Cut this unnecessary middle man out and stop letting big Pharma charge 700 for a pill that takes a 2 to make.
This post was edited on 5/24/17 at 1:17 pm
Posted by Jax-Tiger
Port Saint Lucie, FL
Member since Jan 2005
24751 posts
Posted on 5/24/17 at 1:13 pm to
quote:

There are zero copays, fees, etc for upfront medical use. That's radical. Even france and britain have patients pay small copays and fees,.


It's a disaster to start out with a Cadillac plan and then, when the state goes bankrupt, try to scale back. Once people are used to getting something for "free", it's damn near impossible to take it away.

They need to start out with a very basic plan where only essential care is covered, everyone has a copay, and preventative care is encouraged. Everything else can be covered with supplemental private insurance. Then, if the budget allows, they can expand the coverage.
Posted by HailHailtoMichigan!
Mission Viejo, CA
Member since Mar 2012
69306 posts
Posted on 5/24/17 at 1:16 pm to
quote:

LSUcjb318
Do you understand how we measure profits in America? It's not by raw amount.



quote:

The problem here is that between them the five biggest health insurers—UnitedHealthCare, Wellpoint, Aetna, Humana, and Cigna—which cover 105 million members, last year had profits between them of $11.8 billion. This is not a small number; these are very profitable companies. But total U.S. health care costs last year were in the area of $2.3 trillion.

So, with a membership that included a little more than half of the Americans covered by private insurance, these five insurers' profits came to 0.5 percent of total health care costs.
Posted by HailHailtoMichigan!
Mission Viejo, CA
Member since Mar 2012
69306 posts
Posted on 5/24/17 at 1:18 pm to
quote:

LSUcjb318
Learn the difference between revenue and profit.

You could cut health insurance profit to zero and it would not make a dent in how much you pay for health insurance.
Posted by LSUcjb318
Member since Jul 2008
2364 posts
Posted on 5/24/17 at 1:20 pm to
quote:

But total U.S. health care costs last year were in the area of $2.3 trillion.


This is because they get to charge us whatever they want.

Also people wait until their problem is out of control because they cant afford health care. If they would have had preventative visits from the get go, we could avoid a lot.

Also we spend more on healthcare per person than any other country. Why?


first pageprev pagePage 1 of 4Next pagelast page

Back to top
logoFollow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News
Follow us on Twitter, Facebook and Instagram to get the latest updates on LSU Football and Recruiting.

FacebookTwitterInstagram