Vermont single payer health insurance

#2
#2
when Vermont goes broke, they will expect the rest of the country to bail them out
 
#3
#3
Very brave, very sensible of Vermont. I will have to learn more about what they have done. Others may well quickly fall in line when they see the savings. Of course, they will have powerful inter-state forces aligned against them. Can little Vermont do it on their own?

A new domino theory? Will other states follow suit? Will the inter-state, extra-parliamentary forces of Bill Frist et al. foment reactionary reaction?

And how will they handle the migration to the state? That will be interesting as well.
 
#4
#4
without realizing it, gibbs, you're on to something. Let the individual states make this decision then let individual Americans decide whether or not they want to live in those states.

Sounds like the perfect Constitutional solution to me.
 
#5
#5
Last year, lawmakers passed a bill to hire a team of consultants led by Hsiao—an economist who helped to develop universal healthcare plans in China and reform Medicare and Medicaid in the 1970s—to design a new healthcare system for the Green Mountain State.
Click to expand...

have at it Vermont just glad I don't live there
 
#6
#6
MG1968 said:
without realizing it, gibbs, you're on to something. Let the individual states make this decision then let individual Americans decide whether or not they want to live in those states.

Sounds like the perfect Constitutional solution to me.
Click to expand...

It will be interesting to see if there is a "medical migration" to Vermont as 50 million Americans without coverage might suddenly move. If even 1% decide to give it a try, that doubles the population of Vermont.

There will be a host of reactionary forces aligned against Vermont over here. It will be interesting to see if the 600,000 can make it work on their own.

Regardless, it's not like Britain et al don't offer private insurance. If you can afford it and want it, it's on the market. The issue of choice is a non-starter.
 
#8
#8
utvolpj said:
there aren't 50 million Americans that can't get HC
Click to expand...

It was 45 million about five years ago and trending upwards. My number might be a little high.

Regardless, if 1% of the uninsured think Vermont, it will nearly double the population of the state. I'm sure they must have thought about that.
 
#9
#9
no that number was not just Americans and definitely not just the ones who couldn't afford it. Even Obama's numbers weren't that high.
 
#10
#10
utgibbs said:
It was 45 million about five years ago and trending upwards. My number might be a little high.

Regardless, if 1% of the uninsured think Vermont, it will nearly double the population of the state. I'm sure they must have thought about that.
Click to expand...

He's insinuating that the majority are immigrants and not Americans, which, IIRC, is untrue - illegal immigrants aren't counted in those stats.
Posted via VolNation Mobile
 
#11
#11
VOLatile said:
He's insinuating that the majority are immigrants and not Americans, which, IIRC, is untrue - illegal immigrants aren't counted in those stats.
Posted via VolNation Mobile
Click to expand...

never said majority but the numbers do include them. There is also a part of that number that makes the choice not to be covered.

Like I stated above, even Obama dropped it to 30mil
 
#12
#12
NHS director dies after operation is cancelled four times at her own hospital | Mail Online

How ironic.

A former NHS director died after waiting for nine months for an operation - at her own hospital.

Margaret Hutchon, a former mayor, had been waiting since last June for a follow-up stomach operation at Broomfield Hospital in Chelmsford, Essex.

But her appointments to go under the knife were cancelled four times and she barely regained consciousness after finally having surgery.
Click to expand...
 
#13
#13
utgibbs said:
Very brave, very sensible of Vermont. I will have to learn more about what they have done. Others may well quickly fall in line when they see the savings. Of course, they will have powerful inter-state forces aligned against them. Can little Vermont do it on their own?.
Click to expand...

Why brave?

A single payer system does nothing to curb the spiraling cost of health care. It's not a long term solution. It doesn't treat the root of the problem, it just changes who picks up the tab.
 
Last edited:
#14
#14
nbakerld said:
Why brave?

A single payer system does nothing to curb the spiraling cost of health care. It's not a long term solution. It doesn't treat the root of the problem, it just changes who picks up the tab.
Click to expand...

And changes it to the least fiscally responsible party on earth.
Posted via VolNation Mobile
 
#15
#15
nbakerld said:
Why brave?

A single payer system does nothing to curb the spiraling cost of health care. It's not a long term solution. It doesn't treat the root of the problem, it just changes who picks up the tab.
Click to expand...

Brave because they will be in isolation with a powerful reactionary lobby / corporate interest anxious to see them fail.

As for health care costs, according to our own projections they will keep costs lower. And it's not like we don't have three dozen real world models which show this in glorious Technicolor as we speak.
 
#16
#16
utgibbs said:
Brave because they will be in isolation with a powerful reactionary lobby / corporate interest anxious to see them fail.

As for health care costs, according to our own projections they will keep costs lower. And it's not like we don't have three dozen real world models which show this in glorious Technicolor as we speak.
Click to expand...

Can you please name these real world models? Less expensive does not equal better healthcare.
 
#17
#17
therealUT said:
Can you please name these real world models? Less expensive does not equal better healthcare.
Click to expand...

Actually, in this case it does.

That's why a supermajority of the American public, quite reasonably, want "Medicare for All." Which is a good indication as well as to the health of our democracy (sic) in light of ObamaPlan.

The single-payer systems around the world provide universal care at lower costs and with better health metrics. Silly things, like life expectancy, infant mortality and the like. Things we, in our naivity, used to judge civilizations by. And a host of other metrics too, btw.

Better care for less cost. If health care were actually a market what would an informed consumer going to the market on equal footing buy?

WHO | World Health Organization Assesses the World's Health Systems

The World Health Organization's ranking of the world's health systems
 
#18
#18
I think utgibbs is actually gsvol posing as a liberal so that everyone can bash those views.
 
#19
#19
utgibbs said:
Actually, in this case it does.

WHO | World Health Organization Assesses the World's Health Systems

The World Health Organization's ranking of the world's health systems
Click to expand...

Wrong. From the first link, explaining their methodology:

In designing the framework for health system performance, WHO broke new methodological ground, employing a technique not previously used for health systems. It compares each country's system to what the experts estimate to be the upper limit of what can be done with the level of resources available in that country. It also measures what each country's system has accomplished in comparison with those of other countries.

WHO's assessment system was based on five indicators: overall level of population health; health inequalities (or disparities) within the population; overall level of health system responsiveness (a combination of patient satisfaction and how well the system acts); distribution of responsiveness within the population (how well people of varying economic status find that they are served by the health system); and the distribution of the health system's financial burden within the population (who pays the costs).
Click to expand...

One, the ceiling in America of what can be done for everyone is higher than anywhere else in the world; thus, the comparison from that ceiling to what is actually done hurts America in this study.

Two, a large part of this study is the stratification in healthcare. In many UHC countries, everyone gets the same level of healthcare, thus little to no stratification. Again, this hurts America in this studyl.

You might always want to check the methodology in whatever studies you cite.
 
#21
#21
therealUT said:
Wrong. From the first link, explaining their methodology:



One, the ceiling in America of what can be done for everyone is higher than anywhere else in the world; thus, the comparison from that ceiling to what is actually done hurts America in this study.

Two, a large part of this study is the stratification in healthcare. In many UHC countries, everyone gets the same level of healthcare, thus little to no stratification. Again, this hurts America in this studyl.

You might always want to check the methodology in whatever studies you cite.
Click to expand...

Wrong in almost every particular.

I'm very well versed in the methodology, and the WHO report remains the most comprehensive, cited, and rigorous study on the world's health care system.

And it is positively ridiculous to go down the "stratification" angle. Access to care is probably THE most important metric in any health care system.

The US system does well with responsiveness; that's its one success. But in every other metric it lags far, far behind the single-payer models.

And it is easy to understand why: there is no incentive for efficiency in a private system. This is borne out in the data as well. Thanks to Swiss and Munich Re, the Swiss and German systems are highly private. And they are #2 and #3 in per capita expenditure for health care (although far lower than us).
 
#24
#24
utgibbs said:
Actually, in this case it does.

Better care for less cost. If health care were actually a market what would an informed consumer going to the market on equal footing buy?

WHO | World Health Organization Assesses the World's Health Systems

The World Health Organization's ranking of the world's health systems
Click to expand...

I don't trust the WHO rankings. I think it's political. They don't really value responsiveness (US ranks #1 in responsive care) and that's a big deal to me. Also another that hits close to home because my wife is going through chemotherapy as we speak, the US is far superior to Europe with cancer survival rates. That's obviously a big deal to me, too.
 
#25
#25
nbakerld said:
I don't trust the WHO rankings. I think it's political. They don't really value responsiveness (US ranks #1 in responsive care) and that's a big deal to me. Also another that hits close to home because my wife is going through chemotherapy as we speak, the US is far superior to Europe with cancer survival rates. That's obviously a big deal to me, too.
Click to expand...

I'm sorry to hear about your wife. I can't imagine the ordeal. I know how damn lucky my family is.

I know the US does well with cancer, and I hope this serves your wife well.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top