Why they want you to vote against national health care
- Thread starter Urohawk
- Start date
I'm fairly sure that the US system has waiting involved.
"The Fraser Institute, a Canadian public policy think tank, estimates that 52,513 Canadians received non-emergency medical treatment in the U.S."
Less than 0.2%.
"So we're better than The United States," he wrote, referring to the rankings. "But should we really aim so low?"
Are you just trying to help me?
I read them both. I'm not so sure the guy that posted them read either.
Per the article, which is two years old and numbers are growing worse: “Canadians also reported the longest wait times for specialists, with 56 per cent waiting longer than four weeks to see a specialist, compared with the international average of 36 per cent.”
I understand your opinion differs from mine but understand I am quoting reputable sources versus hearsay and conjecture.
The point is Canada has created a decent system for preventative care at the PP level. That is great and important. If you bother to read deeper, you will see that while they can do that, it sacrifices at the cost of specialty care. There is a doctor shortage in North America and Canada has it bad. They simply cannot pay enough to attract doctors. There is only so much money available. Read deeper.
https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british-columbia/bc-doctor-shortage-medical-fees-1.4100251
No matter who you support, what side of the aisle you reside, there is a problem in this country as it relates to health care.
we as a country have got to do better
we as a country have got to do better
Medicare absolutely is government run national healthcare. Stop playing semantic games.
Joe with your fascination with all things European I find myself continuing to wait for you to move there. Yet, here you remain.
We are not Europe. I am in medicine and have posted on this topic ad nauseam so I will save everyone the “tl;dr”.
Wrong. if your insurance drops you it is a qualifying event for enrollment in the non open period.
Which leads me to another point. Joe is there actually anything that you don’t think you know everything about? I dont think there is.
You seem to be the HROT expert on all topics. Kinda like a Joeopedia. Well that and regurgitating Twitter.
Last edited:
No it’s a welfare/social program. You haven’t been prepaying for anything.
It is a social compact that we as a society have agreed to help pay the costs of our older citizens. For the last 45-50 years you have been doing your part. But to pretend it is some sort of social security type program or similar to a 401k is foolish.
This is one social program I am on board with. But as I have posted countless times those receiving this program now pay a very fraction (13%) of the cost of their actual insurance. Which is why it’s not insurance. It’s a social program.
Think of Medicare for all this way....social security is a great program for those that receive it. But what if we decided that ALL citizens get to receive SS? Well the issue with that is obvious. If no one is paying the subsidy and all are receiving it, it isn’t a viable program. For the US.
The fact is, that if we go to a ‘Medicare for all’ program the costs are going to be massive. Which if that’s what we as a country decide, so be it. But I’d really like someone to actually be truthful when attempting to sell this. Tell people it is going to cost 2000 a month then we can all vote on that. But I personally would expect all of us to pay it. All of us. If we aren’t gonna discriminate for preexisting conditions we shouldnt discriminate based on income either. Cost per person is X. Then what you pay is X.
Last edited:
Yes I agree but that doesn’t mean that it is readily transferable to the population more broadly.
Well hell. Why not donate your salary then doc? Aren’t you profiting from people’s problems?
Fact is, the insurance companies take risks providing insurance. As such they are entitled to profit from it. Maybe we should just centralize all means of production since we are now calling out any profit as bad? Is that what you propose?
I took a lot of time and risk achieving my medical degree and I intend to profit over the course of my life from it. Now tbh I also love the practice of medicine for a variety of reasons but no way in hell I’d have gone thru the schooling I did, the hours I work, the debt I accumulated, the stress the job carries, and the abuse I often take from patients to make the same as a journeyman plumber. (No disrespect intended) Not a chance.
Helpful hint: plumbers make almost as much as doctors do, after you deduct the cost of malpractice insurance....
Thats why I said journeyman. Not master.
I can tell you what, with the way the left has medicine headed, if I was growing up now I probably would have gone the construction trade route. No ones coming after a master electrician’s profit as if it isn’t fair. I mean hell, the reason many bright people go into medicine is two fold. The money we can make and the fact it takes an incredible intellect to be exceptional. Well and the prestige I guess. But that’s going away too with all the demonization these days.
If we go to socialized medicine we are gonna seriously degrade the quality of people choosing to be physicians I guarantee you.
Last edited:
I agree that that’s a debate for another thread. I went to see Pete today and this was a topic he discussed.
That we need a solution that protects the profitability of providers especially in rural areas. Doesn’t sound too socialist to me.
Yeah that completely rings true. Rural hospitals can barely make it work as is. I work in one. And the services they provide are absolutely critical to the communities they serve.
There are a fair number of people these days that call for all profit to be removed from healthcare...a very silly notion BTW...but it's funny, they never think to the next logical step...that is, nearly all real talent will then flow to other areas of the economy where they can realize profit.
It's as if these people think that a sizable portion of the population are just going to keep practicing medicine after most/all of the profit incentive is removed.
And ironically, plumbers don't have to deal with as much shit.
https://www.rawstory.com/2019/12/tr...ants-public-to-pay-for-stolen-ivanka-jewelry/
$47k, because she was too cheap to insure it.
Last edited:
That WAS NOT the hypothesis. It was your insurance telling you they wouldn't cover something, forcing you to go elsewhere. Changing your insurance mid-year is NOT a qualifying event.
Let’s justv
Fun fact: the demographics and the learned attitudes towards the product aren’t similar.
Fun fact: the demographics and the learned attitudes towards the product aren’t similar.
43% of patients couldn't get same day or next day care from their primary care doc. Where do you think this is happening in the US? Good luck. I have a 2 month wait for new appointments. One of the minor, non-life threatening illnesses I treat has a next new available in July. If I don't limit how many I will see then those patients crowd out those with more serious illnesses.
As for the 72.8 per person, I must have mistyped in the calculator.
Last edited:
Do you think your for profit health insurance wants to pay your super expensive chemotherapy? The answer is no because it cuts their profit. So what do they do? They declare that treatment to be a non-covered benefit. There is no death panel but it essentially has the same function.
Look up hepatitis C treatment. 95% cure rate and drugs are 100K yet they aren't covered by some insurance plans. Cost of a liver transplant is a cool 1.2 million.
Last edited:
The fact people don’t understand that profits are merely information signals in a market economy, and they perform a crucial function of directing resources to expand production absolutely blows my mind.
People looking at above average profits and not deducing there is a need for greater production to meet demand, but instead clamoring for price controls and a government monopoly to implement them utterly blows my mind.
Yet here we are.
Yep...saying people in other countries don't like their health care is a flat out lie. They love it.
I am up nearly 1400% on the United HC stock I purchased just before Obamacare was passed. I love those guys.
hawkeyetraveler
HR All-American
Wow. Full disclosure - I am a big believer in capitalism and free markets, but not in the case of healthcare. You just wrote some seriously simpleminded sh*t there. Here are a few reasons this does not work in this case:
1) Supply takes a LONG time in healthcare to be addressed (think about opening new hospitals, training many more doctors, etc), especially since we have...you know...standards and things for medical practicioners
2) IP protection: this is a critical mechanism for pharma to make a good return on their inventions. Its not like you can just stand up competing drugs easily. You have to wait until the patents expire.
3) Timliness of service: If you need a drug that costs $100K...do you have time to wait until another provider spins up their cheaper alternative - no. Do you have time to go to a competing provider - often no.
4) Non market forces: regulation is a big one. But also the fact that you cannot change insurance providers easily is a huge deterant to competitive pricing behaviors. People are locked in with very little choice in the matter.
There are many many other reasons as well. But go ahead and assume that healthcare behaves the same as a run of the mill commodity industry.
