re: Tom Steyer: ‘We need single-payer health care’

quote:

---

Because that has worked so well in other countries…

---

Is there a hyperpower out there that will bankroll our defense so we can take that $$$ and use it for social welfare programs?

What all of the people who support single payer leave out: private supplemental plans are purchased by those who can afford it.

Single payer only covers primary, urgent, and life saving care. Specialty care and pain management are a nightmare unless the patient can afford a private supplement.

Almost all American plans cover these services cheaply. Quite a bit of life saving care is subsidized by assistance programs from state govts and drug manufacturers. Even if it’s not, what the patient pays out of pocket is a fraction of what it actually costs.

Many countries that have a single payer system either have their drug costs or military defense costs (or both) heavily subsidized by the American taxpayer, the latter freeing up a country’s government to have the funds to implement a single payer plan.

Americans have an “on demand” system where providers run their own businesses or have contractual arrangements with facilities. Providers are not government employees. This arrangement allows patients the freedom to choose their providers and their treatment pathway when they want it.

quote:

---

We need the person getting the health care to pay for it.

---

That's fine, but make sure you understand the full implications of that system before you push all your chips to the middle of the table for it.

An all cash system would mean that the cost of routine care would plummet, and that would obviously be good.

But the cost of more expensive procedures would still be out of the reach of the average person. And it wouldn't have to be much more expensive, either.

Remember, stats show that around 40% of all Americans would be unable to afford even a $400 unexpected expense in a month.

40%.

That means that 40% of the customers keeping your local hospital open wouldn't be anymore. So it might be forced to close.

Think it wouldn't happen? Take a look at this: 756 Hospitals At Risk for Closure

And that's right now, WITH insurance dollars coming in to them. Take the 40% mentioned above out and only the richest hospitals would be able to stay open.

So you might only have 2 or 3 hospitals operating at all in a state the size of Louisiana. Better be able to hang on tight if you have a car accident or a heart attack or an accident with a chainsaw, because the nearest hospital might be 4- 5 hours away instead of 10-15 minutes away. Better make sure you don't get cancer and have to travel that distance 3 times a week for chemo. Either that or better make sure you live near the few hospitals still open.

See, it's not just about you being able to afford it. If any significant percentage of the population can't afford it, then availability is still a problem. For you. Not even thinking about anybody else.

That's why this issue is un-"fixable." There are negative consequences no matter what you change and the more extreme the change, the more significant the negative consequences will be.

People don't stop to think about this, but the vast, vast majority of medical interventions used today are—in the context of the history of humanity—brand spanking new. Honestly, the vast majority of them have only been around in common treatment since, say, my grandparent's were born.

Antibiotics, insulin for diabetes, MRIs, X-rays, common blood tests, cancer treatments, heart stents and heart surgery, etc., etc.

We've developed a system based on the assumption that these high tech treatments that require tremendous levels of expertise to administer should be available to everyone. And not just based on ability to pay. Based on location, age, physical condition and/or prognosis.

Maintaining that availability—especially as technology continues to evolve the treatments available—keeps getting more and more expensive. People keep living longer and we don't discriminate or deny resources based on age. The population keeps growing. Etc.

There simply is no "fix." There's only prioritizing, knowing that there is no choice that can be made that won't have negative consequences.

Some things never change.

Didn't Barack the Benevolent cock block that very idea?

quote:

---

Didn't Barack the Benevolent cock block that very idea?

---

Yes he did because his goal was to destroy the companies and force us into a single payer situation. Removing that law would allow true competition and prices would drop.

All other countries provide health care, unlike the richest one of all that csn't.

But we don't mind our taxes to have unckecked/unlimited defense budgets than all of them without 8 past audits.

But, yep the liberals tho. America, stupid and proud

Cali elects clowns!

no we need shite like it was under W. cheap insurance.

obama fricked us all.