Why all the fuss over public healthcare?

Politics and Social Issues
1

Many Trump supporters and conservatives balk at the mere suggestion the US should have socialized medicine.

The irony here though is that many things are already socialized (funded by public money).

The US defense spending is exactly that, public money spent by the federal government on behalf of the people.

Then what of the Police? I don’t need Police insurance or have an armed officer option on some insurance policy to have a cop swing by if my house is getting raided do I?

Caller: Hello, 911?

Officer: Yes?

Caller: There’s two men trying to get into my house via the back door, I might be in danger.

Officer: OK, thanks for calling, you’re in good hands, so let me begin by asking do you have police insurance cover?

Caller: Yes, er yes officer I do.

Officer: OK, does your policy include armed officer nighttime response support?

Caller: Erm, let me see, erm no, it doesn’t - I could only afford the daytime option and I think that didn’t include armed support, I never thought I’d need that round here.

Officer: Yes, I see, many people never realize how important a strong overall cover is when it comes to the police, even in nice neighborhoods.

Officer: Anyway, for a one time fee of 950 + tax we can get an officer over there or we can upgrade your policy now at no immediate cost but that’s a minimum of a year’s cover that you’ll be liable for and that costs 3,750 + tax for the year - oh and also you’re eligible for our 7% retired person discount as well.

Officer: Hello? are you still there? hello? sir?

 

 

 

 

2

The profitization of America, especially when the for-profit exploiters are getting paid with tax dollars, has not worked out well for us.

3

Oh lordie another leftie trying to inject logic and rationality into the discussion.

 

Profits man, YES it’s ALL about profit. Oh yeah and ME FIRST and damitall, yes too much will never be enough.

4

just say’n

 

1024×1024 139 KB

5

I guess many Americans just don’t share your belief that public funding has to happen across the board.

It’s fine for some things, not fine for other things – seems to be the attitude.

6

Yup, sounds like the Republican free loaders ethic at work. Take all you can, give back nothing, while they are pick pocketing everyone they can.

Well, those hoarded trillions won’t help anyone in this future we have created for us. Yeah, perhaps buy a little time, but nothing more. And not too much of that either, at the rate we are going.

The discombobulated insanity going on inside those faith-blinded, self-certain, totalitarian mindscapes is a terror to behold.

7
I guess many Americans just don’t share your belief that public funding has to happen across the board.

It’s fine for some things, not fine for other things — seems to be the attitude.


I don’t know what “across the board” means I certainly didn’t advocate anything like that. As for public opinion one set of data shows that support for government managed healthcare has been rising since 2017 and support for privately managed has been falling. The chart I found indicates about 54% for government managed and 45% for privately managed.

We can only guess what such a survey will reveal in a years time after our country demonstrates how ill-prepared it was for something that has been considered a serious possibility for decades.

I suspect many people form their opinion on the basis of the belief that the population would be taxed hugely to finance such a scheme which is a false belief yet one that is commonly held.

It is false because private systems always end up extracting a profit, which benefits a small subset of investors by quite a large amount. A federally managed health system would not have that disadvantage.

In the UK today (where I am originally from) our system is a mere shadow of what it once was, Thatcher and others since, have worked for decades to increase the amount of privatization in the NHS so it is far removed from what it used to be.

It is a fact that efficiency has fallen over the past 30 years due to privatization making inroads to the NHS. My mother was an intensive care “sister” for many years until the mid 1980s. She tells me how things went down hill.

Examples, today many instruments (e.g. forceps) are use-once-discard plastic and this has led to a need to store large quantities, maintain an effective supply chain, negotiate with multiple suppliers for contracts, store and remove, recycle waste instruments etc.

In the 1960s many of these instruments were use-once-autoclave stainless steel, in a dedicated facility in the hospital, there was a steady quantity with occasional replacements of broken instruments, no huge storage or disposal issue and less overall cost.

There are countless examples of this kind of thing, but my point is the NHS you read about today is not to be taken as an example of a sound publicly financed universal healthcare system, whereas it was in the 1960s and 1970s.

The American public have been hoodwinked by both Republicans and Democrats (who each serve the same master, “the markets”) into equating universal healthcare with some kind of communist takeover whereas that is no more true of healthcare than it is of military defense which is publicly financed yet never talked about.

 

 

 

 

8

When profitization is promoted by the govt, we get businesses that make profit given to them from our taxes. It does not yield the typical benefits of proper capitalism.

That is not really capitalism, fellow patriots. It is Corrupt Capitalism at best, and otherwise, seems to me to be a sort of jury-rigged corporate socialism. (Welfare for businesses rather than for the people).

9
I don’t know what “across the board” means I certainly didn’t advocate anything like that. As for public opinion one set of data shows that support for government managed healthcare has been rising since 2017 and support for privately managed has been falling. The chart I found indicates about 54% for government managed and 45% for privately managed. We can only guess what such a survey will reveal in a years time after our country demonstrates how ill-prepared it was for something that has been considered a serious possibility for decades.
Yes, support for socialized medicine is about even. It may increase as the older generations die or it may not. Younger Americans are more supportive of it because they are either working low paying jobs or are unemployed. If this tread continues support will probably increase but the tax base will not be there to cover a public health system, so the chances of it happening are slim.

Socialized medicine requires a balance between economic and social conditions that we do not have.

I suspect many people form their opinion on the basis of the belief that the population would be taxed hugely to finance such a scheme which is a false belief yet one that is commonly held. It is false because private systems always end up extracting a profit, which benefits a small subset of investors by quite a large amount. A federally managed health system would not have that disadvantage.
There would be a big tax increase for the shrinking middle class, but the bigger issue is the fact that many productive Americans don't feel a responsibility to pay for someone else's medical care.
 

In the UK today (where I am originally from) our system is a mere shadow of what it once was, Thatcher and others since, have worked for decades to increase the amount of privatization in the NHS so it is far removed from what it used to be.
It is a fact that efficiency has fallen over the past 30 years due to privatization making inroads to the NHS. My mother was an intensive care “sister” for many years until the mid 1980s. She tells me how things went down hill.
Examples, today many instruments (e.g. forceps) are use-once-discard plastic and this has led to a need to store large quantities, maintain an effective supply chain, negotiate with multiple suppliers for contracts, store and remove, recycle waste instruments etc.
In the 1960s many of these instruments were use-once-autoclave stainless steel, in a dedicated facility in the hospital, there was a steady quantity with occasional replacements of broken instruments, no huge storage or disposal issue and less overall cost.
There are countless examples of this kind of thing, but my point is the NHS you read about today is not to be taken as an example of a sound publicly financed universal healthcare system, whereas it was in the 1960s and 1970s.


According to this article Britain pays more for NHS today than ever before and the aging population is the main reason for decline in efficiency. (Older people cost more to treat and require more effort to treat).

The use of disposable instruments is a separate issue which probably doesn’t have much to do with increased privatization.

The American public have been hoodwinked by both Republicans and Democrats (who each serve the same master, “the markets”) into equating universal healthcare with some kind of communist takeover whereas that is no more true of healthcare than it is of military defense which is publicly financed yet never talked about.
Not really. As I said above a lot of Americans simply don't believe in paying for someone else's health care.
10

Hugo said: I suspect many people form their opinion on the basis of the belief that the population would be taxed hugely to finance such a scheme which is a false belief yet one that is commonly held.
It is false because private systems always end up extracting a profit, which benefits a small subset of investors by quite a large amount. A federally managed health system would not have that disadvantage.

Oneguy replied: There would be a big tax increase for the shrinking middle class, but the bigger issue is the fact that many productive Americans don’t feel a responsibility to pay for someone else’s medical care.

TimB responded: If the middle class were to get a tax increase at the implementation of Medicare for ALL (for example), there would be a corresponding savings that they won’t have to pay for on private healthcare. OR it could be set up where they pay for their Medicare Health Insurance separately from being taxed for it. Hence they would have probably better overall healthcare and benefits at the same relative price as Private Health Insurance for the same real cost. AND Everyone is covered. Bonus!!!

And recognizing this simple fact, that money is fungible, thinking Americans would realize they are paying no more overall for health insurance in that circumstance, and that if the poor get better help too, great!

It would happen that poor people get healthcare, too, in a Universal Healthcare system. But hey! everybody is paying for that anyway, when the poor wind up at ER’s, or when the poor pass on diseases like COVID-19. Our costs go up in either taxes, OR healthcare costs. Alternatively, if poor people can get better basic healthcare, maybe they will be better able to join in the workforce, and pay their share.

IOW, an American thinking he is paying for someone else’s healthcare is a BOGUS reason for not wanting Universal Healthcare.

11

So, why don’t we just eliminate the States and have one big totalitarian central government? I mean, after all we love the way things are working in Russia, Iran, Venezuela, Saudi Arabia and China don’t we?

12

“So, why don’t we just eliminate the States and have one big totalitarian central government?”

Because there are advantages to having a Republic, instead. My question is “Why does having a not-for-profit, single payer Universal healthcare program mean that we are bound to become totalitarian in the mold of Russia, Iran, Venezuela, Saudi Arabia and China?” It does not automatically follow. Have other industrialized nations that have universal healthcare become totalitarian like those countries? I don’t think so.

If you are really concerned about Totalitarianism, you had better try to insure that T rump does not get a 2nd term.

13

If our current predicament with C-19, with 30 million uninsured Americans, and more to come with those millions who will have lost their insurance along with their employment… If this and the ridiculous outbidding of each other for PPE’s ventilators and other crucial items, by the various States AND by FEMA does not show you how pathetically inadequate our current profitized “healthcare” system is, then I doubt you can ever get it.

14

The title “Why all the fuss over public healthcare” is beyond my concept of being an American. Certainly the health of people living simultaneously in my life time effects my health.

15
The discombobulated insanity going on inside those faith-blinded, self-certain, totalitarian mindscapes is a terror to behold.
You are referring to the Dems, surely.
16
If this ...does not show you how pathetically inadequate our current profitized “healthcare” system is, ...
So, if we were to federalize health care in the mold of Obanacare, all the States and all the private practices would have to give up ownership of their facilities, the land they're situated on and their supplies. All the doctors, nurses, clerks, secretaries and maintenance staff would become federal employees. Of course all these federal employees would be assigned to work in a location determined by some bureaucrat in Washington. That is the way it is in the Indian Health Service and the Commissioned Corps today.

For the socialists this would be great, we would double the federal payrolls. And of course we would need a health care department with an administrative operation larger than that of the military. In fact, we could replace our military doctors and nurses with the new federal health care workers and assign them to war zones as needed.

And of course we would pay for the 7 to 10 years of education required for our doctors. I suppose we could draft people to be trained as doctors and nurses if we didn’t have enough people willing to go into that service with no opportunity to reap the financial rewards they get today. It would be interesting to see how federal workers would schedule patients into a strict 9 to 5 work day, and around all the federal holidays.

It is a wonder why so many from other countries come to our inadequate health care system to get treatment. They must be terribly misinformed or really stupid to leave a better system.; or is it that we really do have the best medical care? Profits in health care are high, but the cost of a federal bureaucracy would dwarf them.

17

@timb

If our current predicament with C-19, with 30 million uninsured Americans, and more to come with those millions who will have lost their insurance along with their employment… If this and the ridiculous outbidding of each other for PPE’s ventilators and other crucial items, by the various States AND by FEMA does not show you how pathetically inadequate our current profitized “healthcare” system is, then I doubt you can ever get it.
What's so inadequate about our healthcare system? Inadequate for who? This is the USA. You don't eat if you don't pay. You guys don't believe in God but expect manna to fall from Heaven. America's free market is brutal enough; and yet, you would push for a secular society separating church from state. Regardless of the pandemic, the church will feed the hungry and heal the sick if things get bad.
18

In the USA we pay WAY MORE for healthcare for WORSE outcomes than many other nations.

Are we so grand that our grandiosity is why we must collectively get ripped off by a for profit healthcare system?

If poor uninsured people go into an emergency room they get treatment without paying. So your analogy that in the USA “you don’t eat if you don’t pay” is not relevant.

19

Ibelieveinlogic,

Wow, the holocaust is coming in the form of OBAMACARE! If it is made available to all, then you assert that the bureaucracy will grow uncontrollably, replacing insurance companies and costing way more than the profitized industry that we have now. You forgot to add the part about “DEATH PANELS”. Don’t leave out the punch line in your insurance industry lying talking points.

20
  • 1.4 million went overseas for medical care in 2017 to get a better deal.
  • Americans pay more for medical costs than other nations despite their medical care ranking last against the world’s leading developed countries.
  • You’ll pay 10 times as much for the anti-cancer drug Avastin in the US than in the UK.
  • Administrative costs for healthcare in the United States are way above average. (8% compared to 1-3% in other developed countries)
  • Americans pay more for medical costs than other nations despite their medical care ranking last against the world’s leading developed countries.
  • The American healthcare industry was worth $24.7 billion in 1960. It is now worth $3,504 trillion. (Hmm, I wonder who has prospered and grown wealthy over that time, in exploiting the ill and injured.)
source: https://medalerthelp.org/healthcare-statistics/