Why Private Health Care doesn't work

#451
#451
"right as rain"

"real world"

were both expressions used in "The Matrix". I'm beginning to wonder if Gibbs is even an adult and not just some teenager obsessed with Wachowski Brothers' movies and who listens to way too much Pacifica Radio.
 
#452
#452
MG1968 said:
"right as rain"

"real world"

were both expressions used in "The Matrix". I'm beginning to wonder if Gibbs is even an adult and not just some teenager obsessed with Wachowski Brothers' movies and who listens to way too much Pacifica Radio.
Click to expand...

maybe he is a projector operator. we've already proved he got most of his economic "knowledge" from wall street 2.
 
#453
#453
volinbham said:
Tell me what you mean by "government provided" because the question does not ask if they want government to "provide" HC. In fact the data clearly show (if you go past page 1) that the highest support ever has been for government run HC is 41%.

The study concludes that the "super majority" want a private insurance HC system.
Click to expand...

Look out your back door.
 
#454
#454
volinbham said:
Tell me what you mean by "government provided" because the question does not ask if they want government to "provide" HC. In fact the data clearly show (if you go past page 1) that the highest support ever has been for government run HC is 41%.

The study concludes that the "super majority" want a private insurance HC system.
Click to expand...

The poll doesn't ask if they would prefer a "Medicaid for All" plan, especially if it provided universal coverage for less money.

Your Gallup poll is centered on Obamacare, BUT it still provided the critical data - namely, when the toothpaste men aren't marketing strongly against government provided health care, a supermajority want it.

The amazing thing is, even after all the Obamacare marketing, it's still 50/50. That's the amazing stat.

From a well-cited Wiki source:

Since at least 1987, polls have shown the majority of the public favor a single-payer system when a New York Times/CBS Poll showed 78 percent of people are in favor of such a system.[48]

Between 2003 to 2009, 17 opinion polls showed a simple majority of the public supports a single-payer system in the United States.[17] These polls are from sources such as CNN,[49] AP-Yahoo,[50][51] Quinnipiac,[52] New York Times/CBS News Poll,[53][54][55] Washington Post/ABC News Poll,[56] Kaiser Family Foundation[57] and the Civil Society Institute.[58]

The current doctors and future doctors (and the nurses) want it:

Physicians for a National Health Program[41] the American Medical Student Association[2] and the California Nurses Association[42] are among those that have called for the introduction of a single payer health care program.

Ten years of supermajority initiatives:

Single-Payer Poll, Survey, and Initiative Results

Oh dear, I was just guessing on the 80% mark, but "citizen juries" go 80% even WITHOUT the information that it's actually cheaper to go single payer:

Two-thirds of Americans support Medicare-for-all (#3 of 6) - PNHP's Official Blog

Oh dear. The doctors DO want it:

The Doctors' Revolt | The American Prospect

Given that even your Gallup data supports my meme, might be time to pooch punt.
 
#455
#455
you can't seriously be arguing doctors want a single payer. i've never met a single doctor in favor of it. not a one.
 
#457
#457
yeah they are big fans:

45% Of Doctors Would Consider Quitting If Congress Passes Health Care Overhaul - Investors.com

Two-thirds, or 65%, of doctors say they oppose the proposed government expansion plan. This contradicts the administration's claims that doctors are part of an "unprecedented coalition" supporting a medical overhaul.

It also differs with findings of a poll released Monday by National Public Radio that suggests a "majority of physicians want public and private insurance options," and clashes with media reports such as Tuesday's front-page story in the Los Angeles Times with the headline "Doctors Go For Obama's Reform."

Nowhere in the Times story does it say doctors as a whole back the overhaul. It says only that the AMA — the "association representing the nation's physicians" and what "many still regard as the country's premier lobbying force" — is "lobbying and advertising to win public support for President Obama's sweeping plan."

The AMA, in fact, represents approximately 18% of physicians and has been hit with a number of defections by members opposed to the AMA's support of Democrats' proposed health care overhaul.
• Four of nine doctors, or 45%, said they "would consider leaving their practice or taking an early retirement" if Congress passes the plan the Democratic majority and White House have in mind.
 
#458
#458
droski said:
you can't seriously be arguing doctors want a single payer. i've never met a single doctor in favor of it. not a one.
Click to expand...

further, here is the byline of the author of that article:

Roger Bybee is a Milwaukee-based writer and progressive activist, who formerly edited the official labor weekly Racine Labor. He has written for a number of state and national publications and websites on issues such as health care reform and corporate globalization.
Click to expand...
 
#459
#459
utgibbs said:
The poll doesn't ask if they would prefer a "Medicaid for All" plan, especially if it provided universal coverage for less money.

Your Gallup poll is centered on Obamacare, BUT it still provided the critical data - namely, when the toothpaste men aren't marketing strongly against government provided health care, a supermajority want it.

The amazing thing is, even after all the Obamacare marketing, it's still 50/50. That's the amazing stat.

From a well-cited Wiki source:

Since at least 1987, polls have shown the majority of the public favor a single-payer system when a New York Times/CBS Poll showed 78 percent of people are in favor of such a system.[48]

Between 2003 to 2009, 17 opinion polls showed a simple majority of the public supports a single-payer system in the United States.[17] These polls are from sources such as CNN,[49] AP-Yahoo,[50][51] Quinnipiac,[52] New York Times/CBS News Poll,[53][54][55] Washington Post/ABC News Poll,[56] Kaiser Family Foundation[57] and the Civil Society Institute.[58]

The current doctors and future doctors (and the nurses) want it:

Physicians for a National Health Program[41] the American Medical Student Association[2] and the California Nurses Association[42] are among those that have called for the introduction of a single payer health care program.

Ten years of supermajority initiatives:

Single-Payer Poll, Survey, and Initiative Results

Oh dear, I was just guessing on the 80% mark, but "citizen juries" go 80% even WITHOUT the information that it's actually cheaper to go single payer:

Two-thirds of Americans support Medicare-for-all (#3 of 6) - PNHP's Official Blog

Oh dear. The doctors DO want it:

The Doctors' Revolt | The American Prospect

Given that even your Gallup data supports my meme, might be time to pooch punt.
Click to expand...

I see you punted when confronted with data showing the Gallup poll doesn't support what you claim it does.

It is not Obamacare centered either since it goes back a decade - you've changed positions on that I see.
 
Last edited:
#460
#460
utgibbs said:
And it is no wonder. There is no incentive in a private system to make people better or prevent them from becoming unwell.
Click to expand...

This makes it sound like you believe that doctors don't care about their patients, and only want to treat those who can pay. This is completely untrue.

Maybe that isn't what you mean, maybe you mean that the system is holding doctors back, but that is also rather untrue, or at least, less true in this system than NHS systems.

What do you mean by that statement?
 
#461
#461
utgibbs said:
Physicians for a National Health Program[41] the American Medical Student Association[2] and the California Nurses Association[42] are among those that have called for the introduction of a single payer health care program.
Click to expand...

Wow, Physicians for a National Health Program want a National Health Program. Ya don't say?

Medical students, that I know, don't want a single payer system... but they also won't state such publicly, because they don't want to look like they lack empathy, or are bucking the system. Those who form publicly visible organizations tend to also swing with the AMA, so as not to raise flags.

As a card carrying member of the AMA, this is my opinion of the AMA. You might have missed it, but I just let one rip.

That said, a single payer system will happen. The earlier it happens, the faster we can iron out the issues that will come with the new system. And, maybe it can open up some fellowships and residencies as people retire or quit.

Completely altruistic, over here.
 
#462
#462
utgibbs said:
That's why it's such a roaring success....

:eek:lol:

It has NO INCENTIVE. Healthcare is not "widgets." It's yet another market failure.
Click to expand...

Are you not comfortable enough with yourself to just come out of the closet as a communist?
 
#464
#464
I'm surprised this made it to 12 pages... sjt18 answered the OP back on page 2. In a TRUE capitalist healthcare system there is plenty of incentive to provide good care. If you don't, your customers go and find someone who WILL. One of the key problems with the proposed system is the loss of all research and development. No one will have any legitimate reason to invest in new and innovative cures. It is a scary thought...
 
#468
#468
droski said:
you can't seriously be arguing doctors want a single payer. i've never met a single doctor in favor of it. not a one.
Click to expand...

I'm not arguing it. I've proven it with upwards of 10 sources.

Y'all are reduced to discussing whether I'm "real" or not, and then proceed to wonder why I remind y'all every time to focus on the real world?

Here is the real world, for the upteenth time: a national health service provides better care for less money for the entire population. If half the money spent on dissing Obamacare (which is a slight improvement, but still bad policy) on this single fact, over 80% of the people would favor it. In general, a supermajority of 60%+ can be counted on to favor it. And no wonder it just plain works better for less money. Only the ideological superminority would argue with such compelling results.

The reason is simple: deep incentives for efficiency.

The reason a private system cannot is simple: no incentive for efficiency.

It's fundamental, and supported by over 15 population sized models in the real world.

Yes, many of the VN posters constitute a superminority position on, from what I've seen, most issues. I believe that's why like minded folks like to form Political Off-Topics to feel warm and cozy in their superminorityness.
 
#469
#469
how is it efficient when, for example, in Canada the wait time for an MRI can be as long as 6 months?
 
#470
#470
MG1968 said:
how is it efficient when, for example, in Canada the wait time for an MRI can be as long as 6 months?
Click to expand...

"Waiting lines" are myth, and no worse than here, for sure.

My stepfather had to wait two months for heart surgery! He's on some souped-up turbo-charged private stuff too.
 
#473
#473
utgibbs said:
Oh, I'm well aware of the propaganda.

Why did my stepfather have to wait two months for major heart surgery? With Bill Frist turbo-charged insurance?
Click to expand...

don't know, don't care

as is the case with most topics here, your anecdotal story doesn't constitute a crisis for me
 
#474
#474
utgibbs said:
Oh, I'm well aware of the propaganda.

Why did my stepfather have to wait two months for major heart surgery? With Bill Frist turbo-charged insurance?
Click to expand...

I would wager that there were reasons for the wait. Was he put on a strict diet in the mean time? I assume you are from a major area, so limitations were not in place, but he might have had to wait simply because his risk was less, and he was able to wait.

Was it a stent or bypass?

Cardiothoracic surgeon field has been thinning over the last 6+ years, and there are generally unfilled residencies every year. Compensation has decreased, and stenting has become more and more common, though this is starting to swing towards bypass, again. The field is moving toward equilibrium, according to many.

But, how would NHS change the wait time, when all else (numbers of physicians in the field, immediate risk of the inidividual and other circumstances) remained the same?

Are you suggesting that NHS will somehow reduce the time under the knife, or the work load on the CT? Or, are you implying that NHS will instantly increase the number of available ORs in a given Hospital?
Posted via VolNation Mobile
 
#475
#475
utgibbs said:
I'm not arguing it. I've proven it with upwards of 10 sources.

Y'all are reduced to discussing whether I'm "real" or not, and then proceed to wonder why I remind y'all every time to focus on the real world?

Here is the real world, for the upteenth time: a national health service provides better care for less money for the entire population. If half the money spent on dissing Obamacare (which is a slight improvement, but still bad policy) on this single fact, over 80% of the people would favor it. In general, a supermajority of 60%+ can be counted on to favor it. And no wonder it just plain works better for less money. Only the ideological superminority would argue with such compelling results.

The reason is simple: deep incentives for efficiency.

The reason a private system cannot is simple: no incentive for efficiency.

It's fundamental, and supported by over 15 population sized models in the real world.

Yes, many of the VN posters constitute a superminority position on, from what I've seen, most issues. I believe that's why like minded folks like to form Political Off-Topics to feel warm and cozy in their superminorityness.
Click to expand...

I now understand the disconnect. You have no earthly idea what the word proof means. I realize that you wouldn't know a differential from an 800 lb gorilla, but math might help you understand an actual proof. Hint: your typing it no longer constitutes proof. That ended when you were 7.

Your continued "proof" of better results in governmental systems is a joke, presumably. Your best measures have been cost, life expectancy and infant mortality, none of which address quality of care in any remote way. Cost most closely deals with the enormous gap between US R&D and everyone else's. Life expectancy and infant mortality are every bit as much about lifestyle as they are care, but I know you don't want to be bothered with weaknesses in your "data analysis." (by the way, I laughed at calling it analysis.)

Pretending that incentive for efficiency somehow exists in government run anything over the top of profit and actual individual health in this scenario might be the height of your stupidity on this site. We're talking about people's actual health and you are pretending that there isn't an incentive for people to want it as good as possible. Tack on that we're talking about people spending their own actual money and you're pretending that there is no incentive. To top it off, you're acting like the single payer system will induce some incentive on both sides.

The issue with your last is that pesky little "from what I've seen" comment, which means it's limited to gorillas, those stoned in walkable Eurotrash hoods, Ayn Rand novels and worthless lefty sites. None of that qualifies as "proof" of anything.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top