- 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 can every other first world country have healthcare for all?
Posted on 2/19/20 at 11:59 pm to BoarEd
Posted on 2/19/20 at 11:59 pm to BoarEd
quote:... or demographics, or cultural norms, nor patient expectations.
any sort of healthcare for all system simply isn't tenable with our current structure of Government.
quote:Of course not. You can't give away trillions of dollars in "free" care and have it be affordable for the minority of people left to pay for it. Math is a bitch like that.
I would like to see something better but that is flat out impossible as things stand today.
2
Posted on 2/20/20 at 12:00 am to HailHailtoMichigan!
The $25 Walmart insulin is called Novalin N, and it's not at all what a doctor would prescribe. It's the type of insulin they used before the stuff they have now. It's pretty much "pig insulin"
Posted on 2/20/20 at 12:00 am to Apollyon
quote:
He needs to know why the difference is important, please do not insult him.
frick you , I didn't insult him.
He's advocating for a different system that not only will frick me over with low quality healthcare but will require me to subsidize someone else.
Anything the idiots in government propose will be based on income instead of age , pre-existing conditions and family size.
I SHOULD NOT HAVE TO PAY FOR SOMEONE ELSE'S HEALTHCARE !
Posted on 2/20/20 at 12:00 am to SiloamHog
quote:
Or we can be like every other civilized nation on the planet and take care of our sick and injured at a tax rate that is the same as what you already pay for insurance to see the same doctors.
It.
Does.
Not.
fricking.
Scale.
To.
Our.
fricking.
Size.
And.
Our.
fricking
Diversity
And
Overall
Way
Of
Life.
Posted on 2/20/20 at 12:01 am to HailHailtoMichigan!
quote:
Doesn't walmart offer an insulin for like 20 bucks?
$25/vial (plus tax). No rx necessary
They offer NPH, regular, and 70/30 n/r mix.
The reason I didn't include this is that this is technically inferior to true basal and rapid insulin. It's got a slightly higher risk of low blood sugars and is generally more difficult to control than the $100 price level. It works great though. For years (before me) it was all they had. It worked great. It will keep anyone who knows how insulin works out of the hospital and off death's door.
There is also the cost of needles, syringes, and test-strips. In either case ($25/vial of which you'll likely need 2 types though you could get by with one or $100/m for essentially more than anyone could need of the two more-preferred types), you'll need another $30ish to $50ish of supplies.
Diabetes can still be managed for less than what it costs most people to smoke for a month.
Posted on 2/20/20 at 12:01 am to 93and99
quote:
frick you , I didn't insult him.
Relax.
Posted on 2/20/20 at 12:03 am to SiloamHog
quote:
It's pretty much "pig insulin"
That's not why doctors don't prescribe it. It peaks and troughs over 12 hours instead of being essentially flat for 18-26 like most of our basal insulins, increasing the risk (slightly) of hypoglycemia and with a slightly higher patient-to-patient variability.
I am a doctor.
I have patients who take it because they can't afford the other stuff, choose not to afford the other stuff, or have been on it for 20 years and don't want off it because it works.
Posted on 2/20/20 at 12:04 am to SiloamHog
quote:Silly. Why do you think something lifesaving should be cheap? If you don't think your life is worth $150/mo, why should it be worth more to anyone else?
Or we can be like every other civilized nation on the planet and take care of our sick and injured at a tax rate that is the same as what you already pay for insurance to see the same doctors.
That said... if you knew what insurance was... and clearly you don't... you'd know that RISK-based insurance will always be cheaper for the vast majority of people that don't have health problems. That only works if people with poor risk profile are excluded.
The rest of civilized world realized this in the 60s and moved away from mutual companies and onto acturaial based insurance. Other places went on to exclude those people by government-imposed rationed care. The opposite of civilized.
This post was edited on 2/20/20 at 12:06 am
Posted on 2/20/20 at 12:04 am to SiloamHog
quote:
Or we can be like every other civilized nation on the planet and take care of our sick and injured at a tax rate that is the same as what you already pay for insurance to see the same doctors.
The same doctors? That how it works? Brutha, kudos for the effort but you are very, very ignorant of health care economics. You will never, ever have the options available today in the system you support. It exists nowhere in the world.
Posted on 2/20/20 at 12:04 am to Taxing Authority
quote:Doesn't get nearly enough attention, and is yet another reason we will never have euro style health systems.
patient expectations.
Most european nations installed their systems either before or RIGHT AFTER ww2. the medical industry still wasn't very formalized nor sophisticated. What this meant was that european nations didn't find it difficult at all to control costs, because europeans weren't used to some high quality, fancy healthcare.
compare that to America today. Our people are used to sophistacted, fancy, but expensive care and testing. You try to take it away to control costs and there will be hell to pay.
This is called PATH DEPENDENCY. Your options today are determined by actions you took a long time ago.
It is EASIER to not give someone something they never had, than it is to take something away from someone.
the former clause describes europe, the latter describes america.
Posted on 2/20/20 at 12:06 am to Taxing Authority
quote:
You can't give away trillions
The idea would be to drive down the cost to near zero through the release of suppressed technologies.
We have within our grasp to live in near perfect health.
The medical system in this country, while great, is still flawed and I'm not going to believe otherwise.
You need look no further than Ruth Bader Ginsburg to see what can happen if people are motivated to keep someone in good health. An 80 year old woman (hell probably older) who routinely at this point "beats cancer."
Posted on 2/20/20 at 12:08 am to BoarEd
quote:
The idea would be to drive down the cost to near zero through the release of suppressed technologies.
We have within our grasp to live in near perfect health.
This is pure fantasy
Posted on 2/20/20 at 12:08 am to WorkinDawg
quote:
This is pure fantasy
No it isn't.
Posted on 2/20/20 at 12:10 am to SiloamHog
Man you came in here as a proponent of socialized healthcare, have had all kinds of facts thrown at you, still seemingly have no clue why you support it, but yet you got free medical advise from (what I'm assuming) is a medical professional.
How the frick.
How the frick.
Posted on 2/20/20 at 12:10 am to Hopeful Doc
quote:I almost made a really snarky comment about this (not aimed toward you), but instead wanted to recognize the tech you've brought to this thread.
Diabetes can still be managed for less than what it costs most people to smoke for a month.
Posted on 2/20/20 at 12:11 am to BoarEd
quote:
The idea would be to drive down the cost to near zero through the release of suppressed technologies.
What are these specifically?
quote:
We have within our grasp to live in near perfect health
How?
quote:
The medical system in this country, while great, is still flawed and I'm not going to believe otherwise.
Of course it is, mostly via over burdensome bureaucracy, surely fedgov VA style control would fix this.... /s.
quote:
You need look no further than Ruth Bader Ginsburg to see what can happen if people are motivated to keep someone in good health. An 80 year old woman (hell probably older) who routinely at this point "beats cancer."
I anesthetized a 99 year old (with far less financial means than Ruth) with metastatic gastric cancer for a hip replacement today. Your example is garbage.
Posted on 2/20/20 at 12:11 am to BoarEd
quote:
This is pure fantasy
No it isn't.
Well why haven't all of these awesome govt systems, who spend billions (if not trillions) on healthcare, unleash these suppressed technologies and bring their nations health care costs to near $0?
Posted on 2/20/20 at 12:12 am to SiloamHog
Maybe your friend should look into moving to one of those other countries.
Quite frankly, I’m sick of paying thousands of dollars out of pocket after insurance for a brief ER visit because your friend had emergency surgery performed at the same hospital but paid nothing. I’m pretty sure he wasn’t turned away at the door.
Seems it would be for everyone’s benefit if your friend packed up and left.
And if he doesn’t move elsewhere, what will he do when I move elsewhere because I’m tired of having more than half of what I earn confiscated via all the various state and federal taxes, not to mention the inflated cost of goods and services that I must pay so that your friend can receive those same goods and services at little or no cost? Who will pay for him then?
And then when those people have no remaining incentive to work and produce because the little of their earnings that they are allowed to keep isn’t sufficient motivation to continue working and producing, who covers the bill then?
Instead of blaming those of us who work and produce things of value to others who ultimately pay for food, housing, healthcare, and such for those unable to pay, maybe try blaming the politicians and their affiliated party for destroying schools and creating a system designed to create a permanent underclass and prevent those people from ever escaping from poverty. Meanwhile, as their constituents are struggling to make ends meet and dependent on money confiscated from others for to pay for basic necessities, they themselves grow obscenely wealthy - not from their own work or value to the marketplace, but from corrupt deals, insider trading and laundered taxpayer money awarded to front companies and fake nonprofits in the form of government contracts.
Those babbling idiots on stage tonight are importing millions of people illegally - people who work for minimum wage or less and pay no taxes. That increases the supply of labor while the demand remains static. This directly results in lower wages for everyone.
If you think “the rich” (most of whom are solidly middle class at best) are the reason your friend is poor, open your damn eyes! People who work, earn and produce are taxed so heavily and pay so much more for things like healthcare that whatever money they don’t have to allocate to paying bills and buying necessities has to be put away as savings or they’d never be able to stop working.
If fewer people were dependent upon them just to exist, their wages and salaries weren’t artificially suppressed via illegal immigration and government didn’t seize so much for other purposes besides defense and infrastructure, they might start businesses with some of that money. Those businesses need workers. That means jobs that wouldn’t otherwise exist. With more businesses needing employees to perform the jobs needed to keep them in business, the demand for labor increases while supply either remains static (status quo) or decreases (deportations of people here illegally). Either way, the increased demand for labor forces companies to compete for the same pool of potential employees.
So how do the workers decide which company to work for when there are more jobs available than people to perform them? They work for whichever is willing to pay them the most.
Your friend’s preferred elected officials are artificially suppressing wages for everyone for no reason other than that they get to remain in power getting far wealthier than “the rich” (as the super-rich Dems like to call them) off of corrupt dealings and stolen money from people who earned it honorably.
If your friend isn’t getting everything to which he feels entitled, tell him to stop voting for fricking Democrats. They’re the reason for the vast majority of poverty in America and are solely responsible for making it so difficult to escape generational poverty.
All those illegal migrant workers taking jobs from some Americans and suppressing wages for others are also voting for the same immoral cretins who sleep well at night knowing that children go to bed hungry as a direct result of their policies.
Your friend would probably have been able to figure all of this out for himself if Democrats hadn’t systemically destroyed public and especially inner-city schools, and sabotaged the curriculum so that books like Atlas Shrugged are no longer required reading. Even if it was, many if not most students these days aren’t even literate enough to comprehend what they’re reading anyway.
If every poor person read that book, the result of that single action alone would rescue more people from the grips of generational poverty than any democrat/socialist economic policy or social program has ever in the history of humanity.
Quite frankly, I’m sick of paying thousands of dollars out of pocket after insurance for a brief ER visit because your friend had emergency surgery performed at the same hospital but paid nothing. I’m pretty sure he wasn’t turned away at the door.
Seems it would be for everyone’s benefit if your friend packed up and left.
And if he doesn’t move elsewhere, what will he do when I move elsewhere because I’m tired of having more than half of what I earn confiscated via all the various state and federal taxes, not to mention the inflated cost of goods and services that I must pay so that your friend can receive those same goods and services at little or no cost? Who will pay for him then?
And then when those people have no remaining incentive to work and produce because the little of their earnings that they are allowed to keep isn’t sufficient motivation to continue working and producing, who covers the bill then?
Instead of blaming those of us who work and produce things of value to others who ultimately pay for food, housing, healthcare, and such for those unable to pay, maybe try blaming the politicians and their affiliated party for destroying schools and creating a system designed to create a permanent underclass and prevent those people from ever escaping from poverty. Meanwhile, as their constituents are struggling to make ends meet and dependent on money confiscated from others for to pay for basic necessities, they themselves grow obscenely wealthy - not from their own work or value to the marketplace, but from corrupt deals, insider trading and laundered taxpayer money awarded to front companies and fake nonprofits in the form of government contracts.
Those babbling idiots on stage tonight are importing millions of people illegally - people who work for minimum wage or less and pay no taxes. That increases the supply of labor while the demand remains static. This directly results in lower wages for everyone.
If you think “the rich” (most of whom are solidly middle class at best) are the reason your friend is poor, open your damn eyes! People who work, earn and produce are taxed so heavily and pay so much more for things like healthcare that whatever money they don’t have to allocate to paying bills and buying necessities has to be put away as savings or they’d never be able to stop working.
If fewer people were dependent upon them just to exist, their wages and salaries weren’t artificially suppressed via illegal immigration and government didn’t seize so much for other purposes besides defense and infrastructure, they might start businesses with some of that money. Those businesses need workers. That means jobs that wouldn’t otherwise exist. With more businesses needing employees to perform the jobs needed to keep them in business, the demand for labor increases while supply either remains static (status quo) or decreases (deportations of people here illegally). Either way, the increased demand for labor forces companies to compete for the same pool of potential employees.
So how do the workers decide which company to work for when there are more jobs available than people to perform them? They work for whichever is willing to pay them the most.
Your friend’s preferred elected officials are artificially suppressing wages for everyone for no reason other than that they get to remain in power getting far wealthier than “the rich” (as the super-rich Dems like to call them) off of corrupt dealings and stolen money from people who earned it honorably.
If your friend isn’t getting everything to which he feels entitled, tell him to stop voting for fricking Democrats. They’re the reason for the vast majority of poverty in America and are solely responsible for making it so difficult to escape generational poverty.
All those illegal migrant workers taking jobs from some Americans and suppressing wages for others are also voting for the same immoral cretins who sleep well at night knowing that children go to bed hungry as a direct result of their policies.
Your friend would probably have been able to figure all of this out for himself if Democrats hadn’t systemically destroyed public and especially inner-city schools, and sabotaged the curriculum so that books like Atlas Shrugged are no longer required reading. Even if it was, many if not most students these days aren’t even literate enough to comprehend what they’re reading anyway.
If every poor person read that book, the result of that single action alone would rescue more people from the grips of generational poverty than any democrat/socialist economic policy or social program has ever in the history of humanity.
Posted on 2/20/20 at 12:13 am to SiloamHog
quote:
Or we can be like every other civilized nation on the planet and take care of our sick and injured at a tax rate that is the same as what you already pay for insurance to see the same doctors
Your response here and to my other post seem to indicate that you think there would be absolutely zero difference in cost if you uprooted the entire, functioning system and implemented a fourth government program (universal, since they already fund or implement medicare, Medicaid, and the VA fairly heavy-handedly).
If I am correct in understanding your position, I can simply assure you that you are incorrect.
How can I say this? I do this for a living in the private world. You think that my $300/m buys all my healthcare, it seems, and if I paid that $300 to the government I wouldn't need to pay a copay. My current copay? 100% of the cost of the visit up to $6000/year. Can you please explain where the difference of $6,000 comes from?
Also, as someone who does this, elimination of the copay will tremendously increase demand. A minimum of 90% of what I and most of my colleagues consider to be overuse of our current healthcare system comes from patients who pay nothing for their care.
Making people responsible for their care is the good thing.
Allowing Idiocracy to continue and further enabling it will not help.
Posted on 2/20/20 at 12:14 am to BoarEd
quote:No such magic exists. But let's pretend it does for a moment... would everlasting life be cheap?
The idea would be to drive down the cost to near zero through the release of suppressed technologies.
quote:Than no one should waste anymore time with you.
The medical system in this country, while great, is still flawed and I'm not going to believe otherwise.
quote:n=1 studies are silly.
You need look no further than Ruth Bader Ginsburg to see what can happen if people are motivated to keep someone in good health. An 80 year old woman (hell probably older) who routinely at this point "beats cancer."
Page 6 of 15
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News