re: WAPO article for you to read today: explains why we can’t cut health costs to Euro levels

So you’re arguing the easiest way to fire large amounts of people is by making them unionized government workers?

quote:

---

Way too much money is spent on HR people at work and on health insurance company staff whose job it is to screw us over and make us take the cheapest care available.

---

Lol. If the health insurance company could cut 20% of their workforce, why haven’t they already done it?

quote:

---

Other cost-saving measures are theoretically feasible but politically catastrophic. American health-care workers are very highly paid compared with their international counterparts

---

That is complete confabulated bullshite.

Neither Nurses, nor doctors, nor therapists are "very highly paid" by comparison. When leveled for median national income, US healthcare workers are often paid less than some of their European counterparts. E.g., straight-up, nonspecialist physicians are paid more in Holland than in the US, even though median US income is 1.5X Holland's.

The singular GLARING difference between the US system and all others is our medicolegal tort system. Everything else pales in comparison. Turn our lawyers and idiotic laws loose on England, France, Germany, Sweden, and their costs would soar in a decade.

quote:

---

long before you had shaken every last dollar from their pockets, they would have fled the country, hidden their money or decided to work less in order to become net recipients rather than net donors

---

it's perplexing why libs can't see this obvious, facile observation. even if it were the case that "socialism" (libs can't agree on what that actually is: see bernie being reprimanded by prime minister of denmark), that doesn't mean it's going to work here, especially given the rugged individualism of americans

quote:

---

It’s practically a mantra on the left that every other country in the developed world has a marvelous system

---

lib darling country sweden is moving to a private model. so much for scandinavian parallels. also, lol at pointing to tiny, lily white countries like sweden and iceland as templates. uk's nhs is having serious financial sustainability problems

quote:

---

that provides better outcomes at lower costs

---

and w.h.o. lies. it has been documented that people who can afford to, leave socialist/nationalized healthcare countries to have procedures done in the us because of interminable wait periods back home

quote:

---

we can’t convert them to space-saving, labor-economizing open wards

---

this and no one wants to admit that an ipab like agency would absolutely have a say in the quality/availability of your healthcare.

quote:

---

You think a government run system is capable of running a system with less waste?

---

Medicare has lower administrative costs. Look it up.

quote:

---

American health-care workers are very highly paid compared with their international counterparts,

---

To reiterate what someone else said, the cost to pay healthcare workers is minuscule total healthcare cost. Cutting the salaries by a third would save a whopping 2-3%.

Good luck getting anyone to work in that environment. Already the nurses and providers are overworked, especially because of EMRs (after a 10-12 hour day at the hospital or office, I have another 8 hours of “paperwork” to get done). Our OR has increased production by 32% this year, with the same or less staff than last year. It’s created a revolving door of nurses and scrubs because their overworked.

Also, many of us go to school from 11-16+ years after high school (17 for me), while living off loans or resident salary, racking up mountains of debt. I have a friend that went to trade school after high school. His earning potential is higher than mine, even though he gets paid much less. I would have to work as hard as I am now until I am 60 to get even with him.

quote:

---

Medicare has lower administrative costs. Look it up.

---

Lololol

quote:

---

Do you really not know the difference between an opinion piece and an article?

---

It's an opinion piece that seeks to explain why it will be difficult.

An opinion and an explanation are not mutually exclusive

the author of the piece has the opinion that it will be difficult...and she explains why she has that opinion.

quote:

---

So, if I present an opinion piece by Bernie staiting the opposite you will read and judge fairly.

---

An explanation is not necessarily true or without faults.

"Bernie sanders explains why m4a is possible" is not a misleading headline at all.