A Stupid Statements About Single Payer Healthcare

[Amarok]

Awhile back i got into an argument about healthcare my opponent was a right winger who essentially argued .

That it was stealing his money to pay for other peoples healthcare and deprives them of their choice of provider 

1. It can't be theft if it's legal theft by definition is an illegal act 

2. Your actually y paying for your own care through a single system public system rather then a private one 

3. This assumes you should have a choice or that not giving you one is inherently wrong

It's an invented right 

All right are invented there are no natural rights 

Competition will drive down prices 

 Prove it 

Private is more efficient 

 Prove it 

Wait times 

 An issue but no system is perfect 

Forcing doctors to work for the government is wrong 

 By that logic forcing soldiers to fight for the government is wrong

[Belacqua]

That it was stealing his money to pay for other peoples healthcare and deprives them of their choice of provider 

 
Japan has single-payer government health insurance and complete freedom to choose your doctor. If you don't like government insurance you can opt out, though I have never met anyone here who has done so. Private insurance companies are free to offer what they can, and many people have additional policies to make life more comfortable in the event of something catastrophic. (I have an additional policy for fancy hospital coverage, mostly because my wife's cousin sells insurance.) No one goes bankrupt, even if they have only the basics. 

I can show my insurance card at any clinic or hospital in the country and it will be accepted. There are a dozen general health clinics within walking distance of me, and neighborhood gossip tells exactly what each one is good at.

The government puts some limits on procedures: e.g. it will pay for metal fillings in my teeth but not fancy white ones like the movie stars get. It will pay for plastic surgery if I'm in an accident, but not if I think my nose is ugly. 

So you can tell your interlocutor that government insurance need not deprive anybody of significant choice. 

Competition will drive down prices 

Patient choice does increase competition, because if you don't like your doctor you can walk. Prices, however, are set by the government for both procedures and drugs.

In the US competition is essentially blocked, and that drives up prices. E.g., no importing from cheaper countries. 

Wait times 

Having a large number of private hospitals and clinics, chosen freely by patient, serves to keep wait times short. 


There's a strange view that a single-payer health insurance system must be like the worst parts of England's. But Japan's is better, and there's no reason not to imitate it elsewhere. 

[Amarok]

 
Japan has single-payer government health insurance and complete freedom to choose your doctor. If you don't like government insurance you can opt out, though I have never met anyone here who has done so. Private insurance companies are free to offer what they can, and many people have additional policies to make life more comfortable in the event of something catastrophic. (I have an additional policy for fancy hospital coverage, mostly because my wife's cousin sells insurance.) No one goes bankrupt, even if they have only the basics. 

I can show my insurance card at any clinic or hospital in the country and it will be accepted. There are a dozen general health clinics within walking distance of me, and neighborhood gossip tells exactly what each one is good at.

The government puts some limits on procedures: e.g. it will pay for metal fillings in my teeth but not fancy white ones like the movie stars get. It will pay for plastic surgery if I'm in an accident, but not if I think my nose is ugly. 

So you can tell your interlocutor that government insurance need not deprive anybody of significant choice. 


Patient choice does increase competition, because if you don't like your doctor you can walk. Prices, however, are set by the government for both procedures and drugs.

In the US competition is essentially blocked, and that drives up prices. E.g., no importing from cheaper countries. 



Having a large number of private hospitals and clinics, chosen freely by patient, serves to keep wait times short. 


There's a strange view that a single-payer health insurance system must be like the worst parts of England's. But Japan's is better, and there's no reason not to imitate it elsewhere. 

I will point out thou that the two tier systems can create patient classes but yes overall your correct

[Minimalist]

Conservatards would rather die than let poor people have health care.

[Tiberius]

Ask him how he thinks private health insurance works. If your personal healthcare costs for any given year exceed the amount your insurance company paid to the providers, then you paid for someone else’s healthcare.

Competition hasn’t driven down prices in our current system.

How efficient something is depends on how you measure it’s efficiency. Are we talking money, man hours, lives saved, etc?

Wait times are a solvable issue. Realistically the only reason there would be wait times is because everyone can get healthcare. So the right wingers solution is to only let people who can afford it have it?

The soldiers example I think is pretty weak. Soldiers volunteer. However the constitution does give you the right to a lawyer, whether you can afford one or not. None of these lawyers are forced to work for the government though, they are government employees just like doctors would be. The whole “forcing doctors to work” ignores the fact that they are still paid and free to find another job if they want to.

[Angrboda]

Conservatives have a refreshingly simple view on things. If it's for them, it's bad. If it's for us, it's good. Fuck you, I got mine.

[brewer]

While I think everyone needs access to healthcare, I'm not convinced a single payer system is the complete answer either. While not a perfect example of single payer I can't help but look at the problems with the US VA system. And I hear a lot from my sister who spent 4 yrs in Canada and complained a lot about timely service for treatment of "non emergency/non acute care" conditions. 

These guy probably speak to the issues better than I ever could. 

https://www.investopedia.com/articles/pe...thcare.asp

https://vittana.org/15-pros-and-cons-of-...ealth-care

https://healthcare.procon.org/

[onlinebiker]

Basic economics show that state sponsored medical system is more economical.


It doesn't however provide the absolute best medical care. To get the best - a profit motive is needed.


In the current system - of insurance companies " providing coverage" you get pretty good medical care - at a higher cost. Daddy Insurance gotta get his cut...... AND they will deny you coverage if they think they can get away with it. It' s part of the motivation - to make money - even at the expense to your health.

....

My solution - eliminate medical insurance. Everybody gets free medical care. The doctors are trained at state expense - and are pretty much free from malpractice suits.

If you want " the best" --- pay for it --- to doctors who went to the best private schools --- and can charge what the market will bear.

[Angrboda]

Basic economics show that state sponsored medical system is more economical.


It doesn't however provide the absolute best medical care. To get the best - a profit motive is needed.


In the current system - of insurance companies " providing coverage" you get pretty good medical care - at a higher cost. Daddy Insurance gotta get his cut...... AND they will deny you coverage if they think they can get away with it. It' s part of the motivation - to make money - even at the expense to your health.

....

My solution - eliminate medical insurance. Everybody gets free medical care. The doctors are trained at state expense - and are pretty much free from malpractice suits.

If you want " the best" --- pay for it --- to doctors who went to the best private schools --- and can charge what the market will bear.

Where comprehensive performance is critical, we choose socialism. That's why we have Medicare, Social Security, a military, police, and fire fighting services.

Allowing defectors to prosper undermines that system.

[Minimalist]

So the right wingers solution is to only let people who can afford it have it?

Always.

The problem is they can't hold the thought to the logical conclusion.  Those people who can't see a doctor are forced to wait until they are seriously ill and then they end up in the emergency room and, if they are poor, medicaid pays for them so the conservatards end up paying anyway although they pay at the most outrageous price.

Rich greedy fucks would rather see the poor die in the streets.  And then they'd complain about having to step over the bodies.