ACA Repeal/Replace: Progressives Face Moral Dilemma

[Kinser79]

(03-13-2017, 04:34 PM)Odin Wrote:

(03-13-2017, 10:21 AM)Kinser79 Wrote: Actually Odin the NHS and Health Canada do not work great.  Sure you can get cheap drugs, and if you're deathly ill you're shoved to the front of the line.  However both suffer from near constant doctor shortages and both also have private practices and hospitals that deal with those who can afford it.

Canadians vacation down here and many given the choice get treatment here rather than Canada--so that should tell you something.

Furthermore we must examine the material realities of places like Canada, Germany, and the UK.

1.  Germany and the UK are small geographically which makes unitary rule. They are also both far more homogeneous than the US.  Canada is large but its population is small, and also more homogeneous than the US.

2.  Given that the vast majority of the countries with these various forms of universal health coverage are smaller than the US and more homogeneous than the US it might be more prudent to tackle this problem on a state level.  This would mean that California and Vermont could try an NHS type model, Florida could try a Swiss model, and Texas a German model.

3.  Trying to implement a model on a national level will result in the whole health care system being flipped over once every 4 to 8 years.  You have to take into consideration that we are not Britain or Canada--we have a presidential system rather than a Westminster system.

This constant change in a sector that comprises about 1/5th of the entire economy (we're talking trillions of dollars) every year will cause not only chaos in health care but in the economy and politics.  Which for me is an other reason to send it to the states.

4.  If we're going to have a welfare state at all like Europe we also have to shut down immigration totally.  It is my firm belief that one can have a welfare state, or one can have open boarders but one cannot have both.

Thanks for proving my point with regards to excuses.  

So you're not even going to consider any of the factors as to why a Single Payer System on the federal level is never going to happen.  I knew you were impervious to facts but this is reaching Eric-the-Ignoramus levels.

[Bob Butler 54]

(03-13-2017, 03:51 PM)Kinser79 Wrote: I would say you're seeing too many specialists.  Really one needs to see a GP regularly, and see a specialist only if the GP detects something wrong beyond his pay grade.  I'd argue that the abundance of specialists actually results from lots of CYA in the insurance companies and naturally that drives up costs.

I disagree.  I'm not in favor of the feel of the modern assembly line specialist system, but I can see the efficiency of it.  My primary care guy is a heart specialist, which isn't my problem just now.  All the other specialists can cover their area of responsibility quickly and efficiently.  In this era of the bottom line, I understand why things moved in that direction.

I did get some early skin cancers frozen off, some intestine tumors removed, my blood pressure medications adjusted.  I'm on a C-PAP machine, and can definitely feel it helps.  I'd just as soon that each of these problems is being handled by people who are good at what they are doing. Expecting every general practitioner to be good at every specialty isn't right.

But then, you're still young enough to feel yourself immortal. You'd have a different attitude.

(03-13-2017, 03:51 PM)Kinser79 Wrote: Indeed in FL a lot of people who would have theoretically gotten employer based health care insurance under Obamacare instead found that they had their hours cut to under the 30 hours per week threshold.  I hope I don't have to explain to you how being cut from full time to part time effected people.

It's not just health care where that problem exists.  In the New Deal era, a lot of problems were pushed into the private sector.  As solving said problems wasn't the private sector's primary concern, as they care more about profits and share holders than their employees, more and more people are getting fewer hours so the old mandates can be bypassed.

Corporations just don't have the loyalty towards their people that existed in the GI's time.  One can't expect for profit organizations to take responsibility for social necessities at this point.  Growing the government bureaucracy is hardly something I'm thrilled with, but expecting corporate bureaucracies to be concerned with the welfare of the people and the nation is truly naive.

[Odin]

(03-13-2017, 04:52 PM)Kinser79 Wrote:

(03-13-2017, 04:34 PM)Odin Wrote:

(03-13-2017, 10:21 AM)Kinser79 Wrote: Actually Odin the NHS and Health Canada do not work great.  Sure you can get cheap drugs, and if you're deathly ill you're shoved to the front of the line.  However both suffer from near constant doctor shortages and both also have private practices and hospitals that deal with those who can afford it.

Canadians vacation down here and many given the choice get treatment here rather than Canada--so that should tell you something.

Furthermore we must examine the material realities of places like Canada, Germany, and the UK.

1.  Germany and the UK are small geographically which makes unitary rule. They are also both far more homogeneous than the US.  Canada is large but its population is small, and also more homogeneous than the US.

2.  Given that the vast majority of the countries with these various forms of universal health coverage are smaller than the US and more homogeneous than the US it might be more prudent to tackle this problem on a state level.  This would mean that California and Vermont could try an NHS type model, Florida could try a Swiss model, and Texas a German model.

3.  Trying to implement a model on a national level will result in the whole health care system being flipped over once every 4 to 8 years.  You have to take into consideration that we are not Britain or Canada--we have a presidential system rather than a Westminster system.

This constant change in a sector that comprises about 1/5th of the entire economy (we're talking trillions of dollars) every year will cause not only chaos in health care but in the economy and politics.  Which for me is an other reason to send it to the states.

4.  If we're going to have a welfare state at all like Europe we also have to shut down immigration totally.  It is my firm belief that one can have a welfare state, or one can have open boarders but one cannot have both.

Thanks for proving my point with regards to excuses.  

So you're not even going to consider any of the factors as to why a Single Payer System on the federal level is never going to happen.  I knew you were impervious to facts but this is reaching Eric-the-Ignoramus levels.

I'm expecting something more like what happened in Canada, where it was enacted province by province. It will probably start in the most populous blue states, like California and New York, and spread from there. As increasing numbers of states adopt various schemes of universal healthcare public pressure will mount for a federal mandate for all states to have universal healthcare systems.

[Kinser79]

(03-13-2017, 05:07 PM)Odin Wrote:

(03-13-2017, 04:52 PM)Kinser79 Wrote:

(03-13-2017, 04:34 PM)Odin Wrote:

(03-13-2017, 10:21 AM)Kinser79 Wrote: Actually Odin the NHS and Health Canada do not work great.  Sure you can get cheap drugs, and if you're deathly ill you're shoved to the front of the line.  However both suffer from near constant doctor shortages and both also have private practices and hospitals that deal with those who can afford it.

Canadians vacation down here and many given the choice get treatment here rather than Canada--so that should tell you something.

Furthermore we must examine the material realities of places like Canada, Germany, and the UK.

1.  Germany and the UK are small geographically which makes unitary rule. They are also both far more homogeneous than the US.  Canada is large but its population is small, and also more homogeneous than the US.

2.  Given that the vast majority of the countries with these various forms of universal health coverage are smaller than the US and more homogeneous than the US it might be more prudent to tackle this problem on a state level.  This would mean that California and Vermont could try an NHS type model, Florida could try a Swiss model, and Texas a German model.

3.  Trying to implement a model on a national level will result in the whole health care system being flipped over once every 4 to 8 years.  You have to take into consideration that we are not Britain or Canada--we have a presidential system rather than a Westminster system.

This constant change in a sector that comprises about 1/5th of the entire economy (we're talking trillions of dollars) every year will cause not only chaos in health care but in the economy and politics.  Which for me is an other reason to send it to the states.

4.  If we're going to have a welfare state at all like Europe we also have to shut down immigration totally.  It is my firm belief that one can have a welfare state, or one can have open boarders but one cannot have both.

Thanks for proving my point with regards to excuses.  

So you're not even going to consider any of the factors as to why a Single Payer System on the federal level is never going to happen.  I knew you were impervious to facts but this is reaching Eric-the-Ignoramus levels.

I'm expecting something more like what happened in Canada, where it was enacted province by province. It will probably start in the most populous blue states, like California and New York, and spread from there. As increasing numbers of states adopt various schemes of universal healthcare public pressure will mount for a federal mandate for all states to have universal healthcare systems.

You can expect it all you want.  It isn't going to happen.  If you've not noticed we're not Canada.  But I'll post the video again.  You really should watch it.





Even your team's last presidential candidate said so.

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/hillary-clin...er-happen/

[Kinser79]

Bob Wrote:I disagree.  I'm not in favor of the feel of the modern assembly line specialist system, but I can see the efficiency of it

Efficient how?  You go to this doctor he does tests, sends you to a specialist, who does the same tests again, but whatever he does causes a new problem for yet an other specialist.  And on and on it goes until you're 70 and going to the doctor every other day and always to a different specialist.  I can't think of a system less efficient then the current system that doesn't involve witch doctors.

No what most people need is a GP who can spot problems as they arise, and then send the patient to a specialist if one is actually needed.  For example you need a heart bypass you don't want a GP doing that, but a cardiac surgeon you do want.

bob Wrote: In this era of the bottom line, I understand why things moved in that direction.

I'd say that the direction was determined on a two fold issue.  Malpractice insurance (IE Lawyers mucking up health care) and Insurance companies doing CYA.  They lose money if you use their service after all, so if there's something wrong they want it fixed quickly.  And they don't want to have four or five procedures because a GP isn't quite familiar with X, Y, or Z.

Bob Wrote:I did get some early skin cancers frozen off, some intestine tumors removed, my blood pressure medications adjusted.  I'm on a C-PAP machine, and can definitely feel it helps.  I'd just as soon that each of these problems is being handled by people who are good at what they are doing. Expecting every general practitioner to be good at every specialty isn't right.

Good.  You want skin cancers removed early.  My BF was concerned he had a skin cancer on his face (thankfully it was just an ingrown hair)  The other things removed are good too.  However the point of a GP is not to specialize in everything, rather to generalize, and refer one to a specialist should a specialist be needed.  Often specialists are not needed at all.

Bob Wrote:But then, you're still young enough to feel yourself immortal. You'd have a different attitude.

Over all my health is generally good except for severe arthritis, and my anxiety problems (which are being treated herbally ).  That being said I have an extremely high risk for diabetes as type II runs in both sides of my family.  I'm hoping to avoid it through a rather strict diet.  Dead Prez even wrote a song about my particular diet.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YTAhSJt_8x8

Of course I've been following this diet for years.  Only thing I fudge on is fish...I'll tear me up some fish.

As to growing the governmental bureaucracy I think that is the worst possible thing that can be done.  If anything the government will have to shrink--preferably before it is forced to by the demise of the petro-dollar.

[Bob Butler 54]

(03-14-2017, 01:21 AM)Kinser79 Wrote:

Bob Wrote:I disagree.  I'm not in favor of the feel of the modern assembly line specialist system, but I can see the efficiency of it

Efficient how?  You go to this doctor he does tests, sends you to a specialist, who does the same tests again, but whatever he does causes a new problem for yet an other specialist.  And on and on it goes until you're 70 and going to the doctor every other day and always to a different specialist.  I can't think of a system less efficient then the current system that doesn't involve witch doctors.

No what most people need is a GP who can spot problems as they arise, and then send the patient to a specialist if one is actually needed.  For example you need a heart bypass you don't want a GP doing that, but a cardiac surgeon you do want.

Which is pretty much how my GP works. I was concerned about a few odd things on my skin, he sent me to a skin specialist, and she froze entirely different places than what I was concerned about. I was concerned that I was tired all the time, assuming my blood sugar meds might be out of whack, but he asked a few questions then sent me to a sleep study specialist. My GP seems to know what he doesn't know, and he just isn't equipped to do what the specialists do, while the specialists do the same thing over and over every day.

His specialty is the heart. I confess I've done more EKG and treadmill stress testing than I'd ever done before I was assigned to him. I guess you do what you know.

[Kinser79]

In your case I'd say you're lucky. Your GP knows enough to now what he doesn't know. The BF thought he might have had a skin cancer on his face a couple weeks back. Went to his GP come to find out it was an in grown hair. I expect he'll be switching to traditional shaving now too.

[Odin]

(03-14-2017, 01:04 AM)Kinser79 Wrote: But I'll post the video again.  You really should watch it.

I don't care about you and Galen's shitty right-wing YouTube videos. You know who also uses shitty YouTube videos are a source for everything? Conspiracy nuts. But then, given how popular Alex Jones is on the Alt Right, that should not be surprising.

[Snowflake]

(03-14-2017, 07:04 AM)nihilist moron Wrote: I don't know if preventive medical care lowers overall costs. It can result in healthy people getting tests and procedures that they really don't need. Due to liability issues, everything gets "worked up" these days. 
Kinser, that's a great diet for anyone, diabetic or not. It's my kind of "preventive care" also.

What kinda name is 'nihilist moron'?
(Geez, it's not even grammatically correct.)

So, what makes you know so much?
Are you a doctor, or something?

[SomeGuy]

(03-14-2017, 06:29 AM)Odin Wrote:

(03-14-2017, 01:04 AM)Kinser79 Wrote: But I'll post the video again.  You really should watch it.

I don't care about you and Galen's shitty right-wing YouTube videos. You know who also uses shitty YouTube videos are a source for everything? Conspiracy nuts. But then, given how popular Alex Jones is on the Alt Right, that should not be surprising.  

Don't you post stuff from Reddit fairly regularly?

[Kinser79]

(03-14-2017, 06:29 AM)Odin Wrote:

(03-14-2017, 01:04 AM)Kinser79 Wrote: But I'll post the video again.  You really should watch it.

I don't care about you and Galen's shitty right-wing YouTube videos. You know who also uses shitty YouTube videos are a source for everything? Conspiracy nuts. But then, given how popular Alex Jones is on the Alt Right, that should not be surprising.  

Black Pigeon is not exactly right wing, but he's not a mangina either so...he's to the Right of Mao so you'd probably think he's Hitler.

Alex Jones is about as Alt-Right as I am.  Unless of course Odin you're of the political school of "Everyone I don't like is <insert group here>."  Which if that is the case then there is absolutely no hope for you. 

As for being a source?  Not so much.  Rather if you watch it a self-contained explanation why I think single payer will never happen.

psssst....it is because white people don't want to pay for doctors for black people (oh and we don't want to pay for whitey either)

[Kinser79]

(03-14-2017, 07:04 AM)nihilist moron Wrote: I don't know if preventive medical care lowers overall costs. It can result in healthy people getting tests and procedures that they really don't need. Due to liability issues, everything gets "worked up" these days. 
Kinser, that's a great diet for anyone, diabetic or not. It's my kind of "preventive care" also.

It could. I think in the US that might have to do with the pay for service system, but I can't think of a way to make it work oustide of that system without having a single payer system, which isn't happening.

Even $hillary Clintoon said so.  Crazy Uncle Bernie might have been able to have pulled it off (as well as defeated Daddy) but well the Dims had to put their thumb on the scale and run a corpse.

Suffice it to say that even if I didn't think Trump might do some good, even it is only creative destruction, but I would have voted for a potted plant to prevent spending four years watching Weekend at Hillary's.

   

[Kinser79]

(03-14-2017, 09:37 AM)SomeGuy Wrote:

(03-14-2017, 06:29 AM)Odin Wrote:

(03-14-2017, 01:04 AM)Kinser79 Wrote: But I'll post the video again.  You really should watch it.

I don't care about you and Galen's shitty right-wing YouTube videos. You know who also uses shitty YouTube videos are a source for everything? Conspiracy nuts. But then, given how popular Alex Jones is on the Alt Right, that should not be surprising.  

Don't you post stuff from Reddit fairly regularly?

But, but, but....Reddit, and reddiots agree with Odin so we know that's okay.

Said no one with intellectual integrity ever.

[Eric the Green]

(03-14-2017, 10:45 AM)X_4AD_84 Wrote:

(03-14-2017, 07:56 AM)Snowflake Wrote:

(03-14-2017, 07:04 AM)nihilist moron Wrote: I don't know if preventive medical care lowers overall costs. It can result in healthy people getting tests and procedures that they really don't need. Due to liability issues, everything gets "worked up" these days. 
Kinser, that's a great diet for anyone, diabetic or not. It's my kind of "preventive care" also.

What kinda name is 'nihilist moron'?
(Geez, it's not even grammatically correct.)

So, what makes you know so much?
Are you a doctor, or something?

I believe she is a psychologist. And apparently yet another one of the Alt Right people here, based on recent commentary.

I admire anyone who posts here under the name "snowflake." Very good

Yes, you are correct about nihilist, although I'm sure she would deny most any category you put her in.

[Kinser79]

(03-14-2017, 10:53 AM)Eric the Green Wrote: I admire anyone who posts here under the name "snowflake." Very good

I'll remember that for when Snowflake reveals themselves to be a right wing troll, Eric. SJW retards don't call themselves snowflakes after all. Just sayin.

Quote:Yes, you are correct about nihilist, although I'm sure she would deny most any category you put her in.

Alphabet thinks everyone is Alt-Right.

[Odin]

(03-14-2017, 09:37 AM)SomeGuy Wrote:

(03-14-2017, 06:29 AM)Odin Wrote:

(03-14-2017, 01:04 AM)Kinser79 Wrote: But I'll post the video again.  You really should watch it.

I don't care about you and Galen's shitty right-wing YouTube videos. You know who also uses shitty YouTube videos are a source for everything? Conspiracy nuts. But then, given how popular Alex Jones is on the Alt Right, that should not be surprising.  

Don't you post stuff from Reddit fairly regularly?

Yeah, but with that I am just posting interesting comments as interesting comments, I'm not treating them as if they were some valid source.

[Odin]

(03-14-2017, 10:45 AM)X_4AD_84 Wrote:

(03-14-2017, 07:56 AM)Snowflake Wrote:

(03-14-2017, 07:04 AM)nihilist moron Wrote: I don't know if preventive medical care lowers overall costs. It can result in healthy people getting tests and procedures that they really don't need. Due to liability issues, everything gets "worked up" these days. 
Kinser, that's a great diet for anyone, diabetic or not. It's my kind of "preventive care" also.

What kinda name is 'nihilist moron'?
(Geez, it's not even grammatically correct.)

So, what makes you know so much?
Are you a doctor, or something?

I believe she is a psychologist. And apparently yet another one of the Alt Right people here, based on recent commentary.

She's a trans-phobic psychiatrist who works with KIDS...

[SomeGuy]

Quote:She's a trans-phobic psychiatrist who works with KIDS...

Trans-phobic?

[Ragnarök_62]

(03-14-2017, 04:04 PM)X_4AD_84 Wrote:

(03-14-2017, 02:26 PM)Kinser79 Wrote: <snip>
Alphabet thinks everyone is Alt-Right.

No, my def of Alt Right is actually behavior based.

It works like a charm.

1. Steve Page's been dropping acid.
2. How does XYMOX_4AD_84 describe said behaviors?
3. XY*, don't know know that .sigs >4 lines long are frowned upon?

[SomeGuy]

(03-14-2017, 05:19 PM)nihilist moron Wrote: Where is Joan Rivers when you need her to tell people to grow up.
I miss the 80s.
R.I.P. to both.

Stop being so trans-phobic!  Don't be afraid to go beyond!