Why Private Health Care doesn't work

#1
utgibbs

utgibbs

Well-Known Member
Joined
Sep 30, 2009
Messages
7,394
Likes
0
#1
It's classic:

No incentive.

There is no incentive in a private system to keep people from getting sick nor to make them better.

Meanwhile, a single-payer public system focuses on efficiency, prevention, and well-being. It urges individual responsibility and patient education.

Classic.

And the data is comprehensive and unambiguous. Public systems pay less for better care.
 
#3
#3
This is why government should also run a single payer auto mechanic. Otherwise there is no incentive in a private system to keep cars from breaking down nor to fix them properly.
 
#4
#4
utgibbs said:
It's classic:

No incentive.

There is no incentive in a private system to keep people from getting sick nor to make them better.

Meanwhile, a single-payer public system focuses on efficiency, prevention, and well-being. It urges individual responsibility and patient education.

Classic.

And the data is comprehensive and unambiguous. Public systems pay less for better care.
Click to expand...

Where on earth is the incentive for individual responsibility in a single-payer system; the motivation to avoid waiting in line for an underpaid doc?
 
#5
#5
I'm not following. How can you distrust a free-market with such a degree, but trust the federal government to be responsible? If you don't trust the providers and health-care industry, then you cannot trust bureaucrats in Washington. There are more incentives in private industry through individual responsibility and ingenuity rather than a government system. I cannot label those "money hungry" companies in free enterprise and a private market as evil, yet overlook the centralization of the health industry by a few in the federal government.
 
#6
#6
bam15 said:
I'm not following. How can you distrust a free-market with such a degree, but trust the federal government to be responsible? If you don't trust the providers and health-care industry, then you cannot trust bureaucrats in Washington. There are more incentives in private industry through individual responsibility and ingenuity rather than a government system. I cannot label those "money hungry" companies in free enterprise and a private market as evil, yet overlook the centralization of the health industry by a few in the federal government.
Click to expand...

Yep and how can you base your argument on the notion of incentives then tout a system devoid of them?
 
#7
#7
volinbham said:
Where on earth is the incentive for individual responsibility in a single-payer system; the motivation to avoid waiting in line for an underpaid doc?
Click to expand...

Sure it would.

Youd cut back on MCDs if you thought a former vet was waiting to work on ya.
 
#8
#8
utgibbs said:
It's classic:

No incentive.

There is no incentive in a private system to keep people from getting sick nor to make them better.

Meanwhile, a single-payer public system focuses on efficiency, prevention, and well-being. It urges individual responsibility and patient education.

Classic.

And the data is comprehensive and unambiguous. Public systems pay less for better care.
Click to expand...

Where is the punchline?
 
#10
#10
Must be nice in the fantasyland that gibbs lives in. Too bad facts disagree with everything he just posted.
 
#11
#11
bam15 said:
I'm not following. How can you distrust a free-market with such a degree, but trust the federal government to be responsible? If you don't trust the providers and health-care industry, then you cannot trust bureaucrats in Washington. There are more incentives in private industry through individual responsibility and ingenuity rather than a government system. I cannot label those "money hungry" companies in free enterprise and a private market as evil, yet overlook the centralization of the health industry by a few in the federal government.
Click to expand...

That's a good sign, because you shouldn't follow gibbs.
 
#14
#14
This model of universal health care, or Obamacare, won't work. It's modeled after Canada. Should be modeled after the Scandinavian countries in which it works very well.
 
#15
#15
VOLatile said:
This model of universal health care, or Obamacare, won't work. It's modeled after Canada. Should be modeled after the Scandinavian countries in which it works very well.
Click to expand...

Don't they also have extremely high tax rates and prices for OTC drugs?
 
#16
#16
VOLatile said:
This model of universal health care, or Obamacare, won't work. It's modeled after Canada. Should be modeled after the Scandinavian countries in which it works very well.
Click to expand...

I don't think it's applicable.

Social Democracies are tiny countries.
 
#18
#18
VOLatile said:
Socialists, so yes.
Click to expand...

That would be why their model works, then. Hard to model the US after them, unless we greatly increase taxes.

Increased cost of OTC medications is why a lot of naturalized citizens take bottles of Aspirin and Aleve overseas during the holidays.

Prescription medications are reduced in price, but not OTCs, in most situations.

I guess we will see how it plays out, but publicly funded medicine is a future guarantee. It will happen, but health care will not improve.

Your doctor, on average, helps about 10%. Regardless of how qualified and how exceptional their care, they can only improve about 10% of your health.

The other 90% is on the patient, through proper education on nutrition, health risks and socioeconomic virtue.
 
#19
#19
Telling (but not surprising)that no one actually debated the assertion that public systems pay less for better care.
 
#20
#20
Ed12111 said:
Telling (but not surprising)that no one actually debated the assertion that public systems pay less for better care.
Click to expand...

Do you think public systems create better care? If so, can you define "better care" and how one achieves "better care" simply through increased access?

Also, what precisely do you mean by "pay less?" Do you mean decreased compensation for physicians, or decreased costs?
 
#21
#21
fl0at said:
That would be why their model works, then. Hard to model the US after them, unless we greatly increase taxes.

Increased cost of OTC medications is why a lot of naturalized citizens take bottles of Aspirin and Aleve overseas during the holidays.

Prescription medications are reduced in price, but not OTCs, in most situations.

I guess we will see how it plays out, but publicly funded medicine is a future guarantee. It will happen, but health care will not improve.

Your doctor, on average, helps about 10%. Regardless of how qualified and how exceptional their care, they can only improve about 10% of your health.

The other 90% is on the patient, through proper education on nutrition, health risks and socioeconomic virtue.
Click to expand...

Beer is also extremely expensive. But I agree, it works because socialism works in their country. Socialism works because they're a smaller population and not capitalists. Lacking greed and such.
 
#22
#22
fl0at said:
Do you think public systems create better care? If so, can you define "better care" and how one achieves "better care" simply through increased access?

Also, what precisely do you mean by "pay less?" Do you mean decreased compensation for physicians, or decreased costs?
Click to expand...

Decreased costs. And I think increased access is by itself a part of better care.
 
#23
#23
VOLatile said:
Beer is also extremely expensive. But I agree, it works because socialism works in their country. Socialism works because they're a smaller population and not capitalists. Lacking greed and such.
Click to expand...

Beer is also better, there. You get what you pay for, as the adage goes.

A lot of Socialists have accumulated a lot of money, property and "riches" that their peers can never dream of obtaining.

At least in a capitalist country, everyone has the same chance at being greedy. Equal opportunity and such.
 
#24
#24
Ed12111 said:
Decreased costs. And I think increased access is by itself a part of better care.
Click to expand...

The decreased cost is hard to argue with, especially when dictated that a physician cannot order a specific test as per guidelines. Or recommend a certain drug, as per guidelines.

The above occurred when insurance companies took over medicine, as well. Still occur, in fact. But, at least if violated today, physicians aren't in violation of Federal law.

Increased access is a double edged sword. It may very well increase education, but only if the patient takes said advice. If they take the opinion that medical care is now "free," then they might be less reluctant to stop some of their bad habits.

However, increased burden on the industry will create a lot of (more) disgruntled employees that now don't have to worry about decreased compensation, as the patient load will be there, regardless.

If my bed side manner is terrible, you might take your public option to see the best doc in town. Unfortunately, his waiting list is pretty long... which leaves good ol' Doctor Nick here to treat you. And guess what, Dr. Nick is a tad bit inadequate.
 
#25
#25
fl0at said:
The decreased cost is hard to argue with, especially when dictated that a physician cannot order a specific test as per guidelines. Or recommend a certain drug, as per guidelines.

The above occurred when insurance companies took over medicine, as well. Still occur, in fact. But, at least if violated today, physicians aren't in violation of Federal law.

Increased access is a double edged sword. It may very well increase education, but only if the patient takes said advice. If they take the opinion that medical care is now "free," then they might be less reluctant to stop some of their bad habits.

However, increased burden on the industry will create a lot of (more) disgruntled employees that now don't have to worry about decreased compensation, as the patient load will be there, regardless.

If my bed side manner is terrible, you might take your public option to see the best doc in town. Unfortunately, his waiting list is pretty long... which leaves good ol' Doctor Nick here to treat you. And guess what, Dr. Nick is a tad bit inadequate.
Click to expand...

That's a lot of hypotheticals, and I'm not so sure they're supported by countries with public options.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top