Why is health care a business?

[Sibirsky]

I'm saying that when you all speak of universal healthcare, you cherrie pick.

No, we compare like for like. I go back to my original question, do you really think that a univeral healthcare system in the US would be like the system in NK?

Or do you think it would match the universal systems in other wealthy first world nations? You know, those nations that always seem to be above the US on heathcare standard rankings.

It's be closer (a lot closer) to Europe. That does not mean it's the right approach to solving the problem.

[Washington Democrats]

Yes. /thread

The government is able to breed doctors? It's able to create medicine out of thin air? And medical equipment? That shit ain't free.

You mean Government might actually have to spend money??

Oh shit.

[Sibirsky]

I'm saying that when you all speak of universal healthcare, you cherrie pick.

You can't use NK as an example of why Universal Healthcare is a flawed concept. You could use it as an example of the dangers of mismanagement, corruption, poor implemtation, little investment and inefficiency, though.

Developed countries, such as America, are able to and do implement Universal Healthcare properly and efficiently and their healthcare improves as a result.

Source for an efficient US government program.

[Sibirsky]

Because of the idiotic way they got insurance in the first place.

Yea that cost too much thing does cause problems.....

That's barely English.

[Fartsniffage]

It's be closer (a lot closer) to Europe. That does not mean it's the right approach to solving the problem.

So what is the correct approach and what is the evidence supporting your theory?

[Washington Democrats]

You can't use NK as an example of why Universal Healthcare is a flawed concept. You could use it as an example of the dangers of mismanagement, corruption, poor implemtation, little investment and inefficiency, though.

Developed countries, such as America, are able to and do implement Universal Healthcare properly and efficiently and their healthcare improves as a result.

Source for an efficient US government program.

We should at least have one that is not logrolled. And it is only logrolled by its absolute opposition from the start.

[The Black Forrest]

Because of the idiotic way they got insurance in the first place.

Through their places of employment?

Didn't you know that company plans are dumb because everybody arguing on their own would do far better. One person has the same weight in bargaining as a company!

[Sibirsky]

Big pharma spends quite a bit on research.

Not as much as you think. Did you know marketing is part of "development" costs?

I see it as costs sure, I would call it "development" though. Whatever. Point is, the spend money on finding drugs. It takes over a decade to make it to market.

[Land of the Trolls]

Why is healthcare is business? Because, like the old prospectors said, "There's GOLD in them thar ills".

[Helertia]

You can't use NK as an example of why Universal Healthcare is a flawed concept. You could use it as an example of the dangers of mismanagement, corruption, poor implemtation, little investment and inefficiency, though.

Developed countries, such as America, are able to and do implement Universal Healthcare properly and efficiently and their healthcare improves as a result.

Source for an efficient US government program.

Yes, Government programs tend to less efficient then businesses.
And yet, Universal Health programs, when implemented as the USA could, improve health more, and cost less per person, than other systems.

[Sibirsky]

Because of the idiotic way they got insurance in the first place.

Through their places of employment?

Yes. It's idiotic. If you switch jobs, or move to another state, you have to switch insurance carriers. Neither one has anything to do with insurance.

And the tax penalty for those that want to buy their own.

[Sibirsky]

Why don't we make healthcare mixed, and give people options? Sure, government and non-profit healthcare are fine, but if it were completely taken over by the government, a lot of jobs would be lost, which even Obama despises. It would be a great compromise, the people can have free and affordable healthcare, yet institutions like Highmark wouldn't be forced out of business.

Free healthcare does not exist.

[The Black Forrest]

Through their places of employment?

Yes. It's idiotic. If you switch jobs, or move to another state, you have to switch insurance carriers. Neither one has anything to do with insurance.

And the tax penalty for those that want to buy their own.

Hmmm sounds like a good insurance plan is a good way to attract employees....

[Washington Democrats]

Through their places of employment?

Yes. It's idiotic. If you switch jobs, or move to another state, you have to switch insurance carriers. Neither one has anything to do with insurance.

And the tax penalty for those that want to buy their own.

So the fault lies with the people that were taken into employer insurance, not with the tricks of the insurance trade?

[North Suran]

Free healthcare does not exist.

Free at the point of service healthcare, on the other hand...

[Greed and Death]

Why don't we make healthcare mixed, and give people options? Sure, government and non-profit healthcare are fine, but if it were completely taken over by the government, a lot of jobs would be lost, which even Obama despises. It would be a great compromise, the people can have free and affordable healthcare, yet institutions like Highmark wouldn't be forced out of business.

Does this include an option to be uninsured and not be fined for it.

[Wamitoria]

Why don't we make healthcare mixed, and give people options? Sure, government and non-profit healthcare are fine, but if it were completely taken over by the government, a lot of jobs would be lost, which even Obama despises. It would be a great compromise, the people can have free and affordable healthcare, yet institutions like Highmark wouldn't be forced out of business.

Does this include an option to be uninsured and not be fined for it.

No, because it would be used as a loophole to deny coverage.

[Kwewu]

Healthcare costs money. That's why.

[Sibirsky]

It's be closer (a lot closer) to Europe. That does not mean it's the right approach to solving the problem.

So what is the correct approach and what is the evidence supporting your theory?

Allowing insurers to compete across state line, tax incentives for the self insured, HSAs, removal of mandates. Evidence is the affordability of other goods and services of good quality that are provided by businesses competing in a free market.

[Greed and Death]

Does this include an option to be uninsured and not be fined for it.

No, because it would be used as a loophole to deny coverage.

How does me managing my own insurance as an individual deny others coverage ?

As for the law the senate bill has plenty of those loop holes to make the mandate irrelevant.

[Sibirsky]

Source for an efficient US government program.

We should at least have one that is not logrolled. And it is only logrolled by its absolute opposition from the start.

I don't care how it came into existence. I want to see a source for one.

[Fartsniffage]

Allowing insurers to compete across state line, tax incentives for the self insured, HSAs, removal of mandates. Evidence is the affordability of other goods and services of good quality that are provided by businesses competing in a free market.

Don't make me laugh.

[The Black Forrest]

Yes. It's idiotic. If you switch jobs, or move to another state, you have to switch insurance carriers. Neither one has anything to do with insurance.

And the tax penalty for those that want to buy their own.

So the fault lies with the people that were taken into employer insurance, not with the tricks of the insurance trade?

Indeed. Don't you know if you remove all regulations, there wouldn't be any cheating anymore? Delay of claims, denial of claims for vagaue reasons or just outright BS.

tangent: I am having an argument with my freemarket minded insurance company whose "expert" a gynecologist said my allergist used an experimental test that really wasn't needed.

[Helertia]

So what is the correct approach and what is the evidence supporting your theory?

Allowing insurers to compete across state line, tax incentives for the self insured, HSAs, removal of mandates. Evidence is the affordability of other goods and services of good quality that are provided by businesses competing in a free market.

Sorry, quick question - When you say affordable, what and for who exactly do you mean?

[Sibirsky]

Through their places of employment?

Didn't you know that company plans are dumb because everybody arguing on their own would do far better. One person has the same weight in bargaining as a company!

Don't you see that everyone working at the same place has the same health risks? In rare cases that is true, but for the overwhelming majority of us this is not the case.

It's also clear that you have never changed jobs.