Now Aetna?

goldfly said:
i am willing to have a conversation

i asked your definition of modern cause it seems like it would differ than everyone else but then all you said was "technologically advanced."

when you use everyone else and yours, it seems to line up as the same and then also lines up that they all have single payer

if you would like to list the countries that are modern that don't have single payer, i would like to see your list as well as the modern ones that have failed at having single payer (like you suggested)

i am here for the conversation cause i honestly don't see how you disagreed with my original comment the way you did
"
Click to expand...

So I answered your question with a legitimate answer. Still waiting for you to defend the map you posted. How are those countries single payer? Let's figure out some of these straw men before we continue. You made the claim so defend it.
 
weso1 said:
So I answered your question with a legitimate answer. Still waiting for you to defend the map you posted. How are those countries single payer? Let's figure out some of these straw men before we continue. You made the claim so defend it.
Click to expand...

legitimate answer?

i feel you're are jumping to whatever point you are trying to make

i made a statement about wishing we would join the rest of the modern world and you said this:

Not everyone in the modern world has single payer. There are modern countries who have much better healthcare than the US without going to a single payer healthcare system. Also, many failed non first world countries have single payer.
Click to expand...

you haven't listed one country yet that you say is modern without single payer. you haven't listen one modern country that has better healthcare than us without single payer (i gave you a map with what pretty much everyone agrees is single payer and the countries that have it)

i'm not sure what your point with the "failed non first world countries" that have single payer has to do with the conversation but cool

so, before we put the cart in front of the horse, let's address that statement

and i quote you "You made the claim so defend it."

Still waiting for you to defend the map you posted. How are those countries single payer? Let's figure out some of these straw men before we continue. You made the claim so defend it.
Click to expand...
 
Hawk said:
A little anecdotal story to interject: my Grandmother pays $60 a month to 'rent' her wheelchair. She has paid approximately $1440 -- and counting -- for something that can be bought on Amazon for a little over $100. Something that will be RECLAIMED and rented to someone else when she no longer needs it. Medicare pays, but you can't tell me that a system which has this kind of insanity in place (and I won't even get into the up-charges on generic medications and other absurd financial irregularities) doesn't need to be scuttled immediately and with prejudice.

These insurance companies need to be castrated and a universal national healthcare system should be put in place with obscene regulatory and oversight bodies installed.
Click to expand...

The insurance companies need to be severed from the federal government. I think you make a great point, which is why does a sick person need to pay above market price for a medical procedure or benefit. But your answer is shallow. The assumption that there aren't better options than a national healthcare system.
 
weso1 said:
This is our disagreement.
Click to expand...

obviously. your ideas presented thus far of just keeping it the same don't really help the normal person overall. we have people going bankrupt cause of an accident or cancer etc etc

don't see how this system benefits in anyway the normal person

i would still like to see your list for this statement:

Not everyone in the modern world has single payer. There are modern countries who have much better healthcare than the US without going to a single payer healthcare system.
Click to expand...
 
Single pay won't work here. The docs want their pay and that is why some of them refuse Obamacare patients because they don't receive their full amount of services rendered. The docs in other countries do not even compete in salary compare to American doctors plus we are very stringent on requirements because of lawsuits. Most Euro countries have a cap on negligence while we don't. Plus their hospitals do not require so many different procedures or bureaucracy like ours.
 
AerchAngel said:
Single pay won't work here. The docs want their pay and that is why some of them refuse Obamacare patients because they don't receive their full amount of services rendered. The docs in other countries do not even compete in salary compare to American doctors plus we are very stringent on requirements because of lawsuits. Most Euro countries have a cap on negligence while we don't. Plus their hospitals do not require so many different procedures or bureaucracy like ours.
Click to expand...

i'm not sure why you and others etc act like none of that can be changed
 
goldfly said:
i'm not sure why you and others etc act like none of that can be changed
Click to expand...

You can't change pay? The docs want to keep their salary they have now, they are not going to take a cut regardless what care is proposed. The hospitals will wants their pay as well and you can't cut that. The patients will want the ability to sue and you can't take that away. You cannot cut any of those things and this is why it cost a lot when an accident happen or you get sick. If we are taxed like the Euros there will be the elite and the poor and the middle class will be the poor.

If they adopt the Euro model of care, won't fly here. People don't want a cap on suing, they don't want to be seen by interns or docs with no experience, ie patients are lab rats. They do not want rooms that have 3 or 4 patients in them and those who have their own rooms pay insurance to get those good rooms and doctors. Personally I like this arrangement, no insurance, you get basic service, the less quality doctors and you can't sue, that is the price you pay, while those who can afford insurance or company bought can get the penthouse treatment.
 
AerchAngel said:
You can't change pay? The docs want to keep their salary they have now, they are not going to take a cut regardless what care is proposed. The hospitals will wants their pay as well and you can't cut that. The patients will want the ability to sue and you can't take that away. You cannot cut any of those things and this is why it cost a lot when an accident happen or you get sick. If we are taxed like the Euros there will be the elite and the poor and the middle class will be the poor.

If they adopt the Euro model of care, won't fly here. People don't want a cap on suing, they don't want to be seen by interns or docs with no experience, ie patients are lab rats. They do not want rooms that have 3 or 4 patients in them and those who have their own rooms pay insurance to get those good rooms and doctors. Personally I like this arrangement, no insurance, you get basic service, the less quality doctors and you can't sue, that is the price you pay, while those who can afford insurance or company bought can get the penthouse treatment.
Click to expand...

I think that's got to be the exchange. Do people want affordable, quality health care? Then perhaps they must surrender their ability to sue the snot out of a practitioner - except in cases of clear-cut negligence (and even then, frankly, I wouldn't be opposed to a reasonable or 'soft' cap). We've long needed tort reform in this country anyways.

Of course doctors don't want to give up their ability to charge extortionate fees ... but bending their arm is as simple as tying certifications/re-certifications to participation in the model. A hospital system doesn't want to participate? Then their facilities don't receive licenses.
 
goldfly said:
yeah, no modern countries do it

IT'S IMPOSSIBLE TO DO!!!
Click to expand...

I'm curious if you think we'd see the same level of pharmacy innovation in a single payer system.

Currently - the US is the leader in drug innovation. I'd have to assume at least part of that is the great financial reward for doing so
 
lebduck.gif
 
as much as i enjoy keep spinning the topic to whatever point you want to make till we are so far off the topic is fun

i would rather stick to the topic of single payer and wait for the answer to this one: "Not everyone in the modern world has single payer. There are modern countries who have much better healthcare than the US without going to a single payer healthcare system."

anyone who wants to talk about big pharms profits after them acting like some countries haven't gotten prices down by subsidizing medicine isn't really worth the time other than a lebron gif showing how exhausting trying to interact with such a person is
 
goldfly said:
as much as i enjoy keep spinning the topic to whatever point you want to make till we are so far off the topic is fun

i would rather stick to the topic of single payer and wait for the answer to this one: "Not everyone in the modern world has single payer. There are modern countries who have much better healthcare than the US without going to a single payer healthcare system."

anyone who wants to talk about big pharms profits after them acting like some countries haven't gotten prices down by subsidizing medicine isn't really worth the time other than a lebron gif showing how exhausting trying to interact with such a person is
Click to expand...

OK... that's weso's question not mine.

This is why you're such a joke. It is literally impossible to actually have a discussion with you.

I asked a direct, reasonable question to related to the topic. Do you care to answer it, directly?
 
oh noes, i'm a joke to you. what will i ever do

i didn't say it was your question

i just said i would rather wait for an answer on that question than deal with your games that keep spinning topics

sorry that was too hard for you to understand oh wise one

i really don't care about big pharm or your question. i really don't care if their profits will go from 400 billion to 200 billion or 100 billion or 50 billion and so on

so if you want to talk about big pharm and their profits, start a ****ing thread about it and spit whatever bull**** you want about how they should make a **** ton of money off people that get cancer

or don't start that thread, i honestly don't care what you decide to do
 
goldfly said:
oh noes, i'm a joke to you. what will i ever do

i didn't say it was your question

i just said i would rather wait for an answer on that question than deal with your games that keep spinning topics

sorry that was too hard for you to understand oh wise one

i really don't care about big pharm or your question. i really don't care if their profits will go from 400 billion to 200 billion or 100 billion or 50 billion and so on

so if you want to talk about big pharm and their profits, start a ****ing thread about it and spit whatever bull**** you want about how they should make a **** ton of money off people that get cancer

or don't start that thread, i honestly don't care what you decide to do
Click to expand...

It's sad you can't be an adult for 5 seconds and discuss the topic at hand.

You made a point about how it would be ideal if we went to universal.

I asked you, if that were to happen, do you think that US pharma would invest as much in medical innovation as they do today?

You came back with childish nonsense.

Good talk.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top