- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Why does the healthcare debate essentially revolve around like 4% of Americans?
Posted on 9/21/17 at 1:19 am to Taxing Authority
Posted on 9/21/17 at 1:19 am to Taxing Authority
quote:
Are you sure? If.. say.. the government said: no more hip replacements for anyone over 65 years of age... your hospital would still provide hip replacements to 70 year old patients -- because the system is single payer? I'm sorry but I don't believe that. Going to single payer won't make providers suddenly become charitable givers. They could do that now.
I wasn't arguing that they'd provide the same kind of care. In fact, I was arguing that having a single payer would likely change the kind of care for the better (tying payment to outcomes, denying certain kinds of treatments/tests outright in certain clinical situations). Ortho's not my field but there are plenty of fields that over-operate compared to other kinds of care. I think we're saying sort of the same thing in different ways, actually.
As for the politics, I agree with you, at least in the short-term. Most people are mostly ok with the health care they have and are awfully fearful of change. Getting rid of employer-based health insurance would raise wages considerably eventually, but not quick enough to cover the sticker shock of new taxes (I don't think they'd do a payroll tax, but would opt for a VAT instead, though). If the government used debt initially to finance it and deferred new taxes a bit that might make it more palatable.
Still, I think the Dems would be smarter politically to run on a medicare buy-in or public option.
Posted on 9/21/17 at 1:30 am to TigerDoc
quote:As a doc, I'm surprised you think that congress and bureaucrats. can better determine appropriate care than you can. Perhaps in your case you're right?
I was arguing that having a single payer would likely change the kind of care for the better (tying payment to outcomes, denying certain kinds of treatments/tests outright in certain clinical situations).
![](https://images.tigerdroppings.com/Images/icons/shrug.gif)
And nothing prevents docs from making those determinations now. It's not like you need permission from the government to make appropriate treatment decisions.
quote:emplyer-based plans are almost universally loved by employees. You think congress is going to take that away?
Getting rid of employer-based health insurance would raise wages considerably eventually
quote:Except that would undermine any increase in wages and negate what employers would save from eliminate healthcare benefits. Squeeze the balloon however you like. There just isn't enough money.
I don't think they'd do a payroll tax, but would opt for a VAT instead, though
quote:like how congress paid off the military debt with savings from "peace dividend" when the USSR failed?
If the government used debt initially to finance it and deferred new taxes a bit that might make it more palatable.
![](https://images.tigerdroppings.com/Images/Icons/IconLOL.gif)
quote:.OF Course!! As long as they don't talk about who will be paying for it.
Still, I think the Dems would be smarter politically to run on a medicare buy-in or public option
This post was edited on 9/21/17 at 1:33 am
Popular
Back to top
![logo](https://images.tigerdroppings.com/images/layout/TDIcon.jpg)