The manner in which our govt administers its programs is extremely inefficient. Everyone should unite to fix this problem ,and then, we can all go back to our "sides" and debate who should be taxed, and where should said tax dollars be spent.
If we did have UHC, the quality of care would be reduced, and some of the poulation would turn to doctors whom they pay out of their own pocket.
The same thing has happened with many of pur public schools.....the wealthy stick their kids in private schools, and at the same time, the quality of the public schools goes way down.
There will always be more options for the wealthy (whether its right or wrong), so any reform needs to focus on providing care to the poor, as well as the middle class who truly can't afford medical care.
The current system is horribly inefficient. I agree that gov't isn't the most efficient but a single payer system would be much more efficient than the current multipayer system. Just the paperwork alone is a multi billion dollar problem. Eliminate it completely with single payer.....one set of medical records per citizen filed under their social security number accessible by any provider they visit....sounds very efficient to me.
Would you have the govt administer the single payer plan?
The manner in which our govt administers its programs is extremely inefficient. Everyone should unite to fix this problem ,and then, we can all go back to our "sides" and debate who should be taxed, and where should said tax dollars be spent.
If we did have UHC, the quality of care would be reduced, and some of the poulation would turn to doctors whom they pay out of their own pocket.
The same thing has happened with many of pur public schools.....the wealthy stick their kids in private schools, and at the same time, the quality of the public schools goes way down.
There will always be more options for the wealthy (whether its right or wrong), so any reform needs to focus on providing care to the poor, as well as the middle class who truly can't afford medical care.
The current system is horribly inefficient. I agree that gov't isn't the most efficient but a single payer system would be much more efficient than the current multipayer system. Just the paperwork alone is a multi billion dollar problem. Eliminate it completely with single payer.....one set of medical records per citizen filed under their social security number accessible by any provider they visit....sounds very efficient to me.
Would you have the govt administer the single payer plan?
the single payer plan is already in place....it's called "Medicare"
Remember the Thomas Nine !! (10/02/2018) The Golden Age is 2 months away. And guess what….. you’re gonna love it! (teskeinc 11.19.24)
1998: Noblesville; 2003: Noblesville; 2009: EV Nashville, Chicago, Chicago 2010: St Louis, Columbus, Noblesville; 2011: EV Chicago, East Troy, East Troy 2013: London ON, Wrigley; 2014: Cincy, St Louis, Moline (NO CODE) 2016: Lexington, Wrigley #1; 2018: Wrigley, Wrigley, Boston, Boston 2020: Oakland, Oakland:2021: EV Ohana, Ohana, Ohana, Ohana 2022: Oakland, Oakland, Nashville, Louisville; 2023: Chicago, Chicago, Noblesville 2024: Noblesville, Wrigley, Wrigley, Ohana, Ohana; 2025: Pitt1, Pitt2
If we did have UHC, the quality of care would be reduced, and some of the poulation would turn to doctors whom they pay out of their own pocket.
The same thing has happened with many of pur public schools.....the wealthy stick their kids in private schools, and at the same time, the quality of the public schools goes way down.
There will always be more options for the wealthy (whether its right or wrong), so any reform needs to focus on providing care to the poor, as well as the middle class who truly can't afford medical care.[/quote]
The current system is horribly inefficient. I agree that gov't isn't the most efficient but a single payer system would be much more efficient than the current multipayer system. Just the paperwork alone is a multi billion dollar problem. Eliminate it completely with single payer.....one set of medical records per citizen filed under their social security number accessible by any provider they visit....sounds very efficient to me.[/quote]
Would you have the govt administer the single payer plan?[/quote]
the single payer plan is already in place....it's called "Medicare"[/quote]
Do you think medicare can expand several folds and improve their operation?
Haha! I'm quite certain I never said any such thing.
You seem to be having a bad day.
do you think Dr's pay should be controlled like your little friend Gern?
Boy, you really do have your panties in a wad today, don't you?
A. I don't know Gern any more than you do.
B. I don't get the impression that s/he is saying doctors' pay should be controlled in the way you seem to think s/he is anyway. The impression I got is that s/he belives a system which is based on greed and not health is inappropriate. (But I don't want to speak for him/her.)
C. I don't even believe that doctors control their own pay. They are victims of this healthcare system too.
no, thats not what I'm saying. I do want those who can't afford health care to be helped. what I dont want is to dictate how much a Doctor should make.
But you're dictating how they should & shouldn't be helped.
how so?
By saying we shouldn't help them via a universal healthcare system.
By saying we shouldn't help them via a universal healthcare system.
I dont believe a universail healthcare system would be helpful. but you are taking this way out of context as usual. we were talking about Dr's pay, thats it. stop expanding it to opinons about healthcare in general.
your little friend Gern said Dr's sholdnt be allowed to make $450k. she believes she has a right to determinte how much they should make.
you've usually been above the personal attacks in the past. how about you not start now?
I am above personal attacks; I was just responding to your tone. How about you stop calling Gern "my little friend" and I won't make any more comments about your panties?
Do you think medicare can expand several folds and improve their operation?
I don't know as much about the Medicare program in particular as I do about the Medicaid program, and have never advocated creating a universal, single-payer system by expanding Medicare per se.
What I do know is this:
1. The funding for Medicare - or whatever system we use - would be greatly increased if all the money now going to private, for-profit insurance companies went to the new system instead.
2. Medicare is already much more efficient than private insurance plans, with only 2-3% of Medicare funds going toward overhead while private insurance spends 16-30% of its funds on overhead.
Do you think medicare can expand several folds and improve their operation?
I don't know as much about the Medicare program in particular as I do about the Medicaid program, and have never advocated creating a universal, single-payer system by expanding Medicare per se.
What I do know is this:
1. The funding for Medicare - or whatever system we use - would be greatly increased if all the money now going to private, for-profit insurance companies went to the new system instead.
2. Medicare is already much more efficient than private insurance plans, with only 2-3% of Medicare funds going toward overhead while private insurance spends 16-30% of its funds on overhead.
What % does the unemployment rate reach when you get rid of the insurance companies?
I don't know as much about the Medicare program in particular as I do about the Medicaid program, and have never advocated creating a universal, single-payer system by expanding Medicare per se.
What I do know is this:
1. The funding for Medicare - or whatever system we use - would be greatly increased if all the money now going to private, for-profit insurance companies went to the new system instead.
2. Medicare is already much more efficient than private insurance plans, with only 2-3% of Medicare funds going toward overhead while private insurance spends 16-30% of its funds on overhead.
What % does the unemployment rate reach when you get rid of the insurance companies?
There will be no change because all those people will fill the healthcare provider jobs.
Regardless, I don't think this is really a valid argument for keeping health insurance companies around at the expense of our healthcare system, do you?
actually tons of them work and receive paychecks/W-2's using false Social security numbers....then they never file tax returns because the IRS can pick up on the false SSN so the IRS gets to keep all the money they paid in since they can't file a return to get a refund
define "tons"
"Our assumption is that about three-quarters of other-than-legal immigrants pay payroll taxes," said Stephen C. Goss, Social Security's chief actuary, using the agency's term for illegal immigration.
There will be no change because all those people will fill the healthcare provider jobs.
Regardless, I don't think this is really a valid argument for keeping health insurance companies around at the expense of our healthcare system, do you?
Well #1...your wrong. There will be a change, the unemployment % will go way down because we all know it takes 4 gov't workers to do the work of 1 non-gov't worker.
#2 - I was joking, hence the smiley. Don't get your panties in a bunch.
This current system sucks. A gov't run system sucks.
actually tons of them work and receive paychecks/W-2's using false Social security numbers....then they never file tax returns because the IRS can pick up on the false SSN so the IRS gets to keep all the money they paid in since they can't file a return to get a refund
define "tons"
"Our assumption is that about three-quarters of other-than-legal immigrants pay payroll taxes," said Stephen C. Goss, Social Security's chief actuary, using the agency's term for illegal immigration.
heh....I'm a small business owner and a business advisor....it's amazing how many right winger clients I have that are starting to see the light...
I have a good friend who's been a conservative ever since I've known him (since high school). He moved to England for work a couple of years ago and recently came back to visit for the first time. After experiencing both systems, he actually said the words... and I had to ask him to repeat himself 3 times to be sure I heard him correctly..... "socialism is the only way to go".
so just because one person you know has that opinion we all should ? :roll:
heh....I'm a small business owner and a business advisor....it's amazing how many right winger clients I have that are starting to see the light...
I have a good friend who's been a conservative ever since I've known him (since high school). He moved to England for work a couple of years ago and recently came back to visit for the first time. After experiencing both systems, he actually said the words... and I had to ask him to repeat himself 3 times to be sure I heard him correctly..... "socialism is the only way to go".
so just because one person you know has that opinion we all should ? :roll:
Of course not. I was just relating to Gern and I'm sure you know that. :roll:
But I do value the opinions of those who have lived under those systems (or, better yet, both systems) more so than those who want to hate on a system with which they have no experience.
heh....I'm a small business owner and a business advisor....it's amazing how many right winger clients I have that are starting to see the light...
I have a good friend who's been a conservative ever since I've known him (since high school). He moved to England for work a couple of years ago and recently came back to visit for the first time. After experiencing both systems, he actually said the words... and I had to ask him to repeat himself 3 times to be sure I heard him correctly..... "socialism is the only way to go".
so just because one person you know has that opinion we all should ? :roll:
Ya know... seriously... where do you people get this stuff from???
Comments
Would you have the govt administer the single payer plan?
the single payer plan is already in place....it's called "Medicare"
The Golden Age is 2 months away. And guess what….. you’re gonna love it! (teskeinc 11.19.24)
1998: Noblesville; 2003: Noblesville; 2009: EV Nashville, Chicago, Chicago
2010: St Louis, Columbus, Noblesville; 2011: EV Chicago, East Troy, East Troy
2013: London ON, Wrigley; 2014: Cincy, St Louis, Moline (NO CODE)
2016: Lexington, Wrigley #1; 2018: Wrigley, Wrigley, Boston, Boston
2020: Oakland, Oakland: 2021: EV Ohana, Ohana, Ohana, Ohana
2022: Oakland, Oakland, Nashville, Louisville; 2023: Chicago, Chicago, Noblesville
2024: Noblesville, Wrigley, Wrigley, Ohana, Ohana; 2025: Pitt1, Pitt2
and its 30 trillion underfunded
The same thing has happened with many of pur public schools.....the wealthy stick their kids in private schools, and at the same time, the quality of the public schools goes way down.
There will always be more options for the wealthy (whether its right or wrong), so any reform needs to focus on providing care to the poor, as well as the middle class who truly can't afford medical care.[/quote]
The current system is horribly inefficient. I agree that gov't isn't the most efficient but a single payer system would be much more efficient than the current multipayer system. Just the paperwork alone is a multi billion dollar problem. Eliminate it completely with single payer.....one set of medical records per citizen filed under their social security number accessible by any provider they visit....sounds very efficient to me.[/quote]
Would you have the govt administer the single payer plan?[/quote]
the single payer plan is already in place....it's called "Medicare"[/quote]
Do you think medicare can expand several folds and improve their operation?
Boy, you really do have your panties in a wad today, don't you?
A. I don't know Gern any more than you do.
B. I don't get the impression that s/he is saying doctors' pay should be controlled in the way you seem to think s/he is anyway. The impression I got is that s/he belives a system which is based on greed and not health is inappropriate. (But I don't want to speak for him/her.)
C. I don't even believe that doctors control their own pay. They are victims of this healthcare system too.
By saying we shouldn't help them via a universal healthcare system.
get over youself
I dont believe a universail healthcare system would be helpful. but you are taking this way out of context as usual. we were talking about Dr's pay, thats it. stop expanding it to opinons about healthcare in general.
your little friend Gern said Dr's sholdnt be allowed to make $450k. she believes she has a right to determinte how much they should make.
Sure thing, pal.
you've usually been above the personal attacks in the past. how about you not start now?
I am above personal attacks; I was just responding to your tone. How about you stop calling Gern "my little friend" and I won't make any more comments about your panties?
no you're not. I can count about 4 today alone.
I'd like to know what they are. But this conversation should probably be continued via PM.
P.S. Sorry if I hurt your feelings.
you didnt hurt my feelings, childish behavoir and cheap shot personal attacks arent necessary while trying to debate a very important topic.
I agree, and that was my point to you to begin with. Now let's get over it and move on. (That's my 3rd attempt.)
I don't know as much about the Medicare program in particular as I do about the Medicaid program, and have never advocated creating a universal, single-payer system by expanding Medicare per se.
What I do know is this:
1. The funding for Medicare - or whatever system we use - would be greatly increased if all the money now going to private, for-profit insurance companies went to the new system instead.
2. Medicare is already much more efficient than private insurance plans, with only 2-3% of Medicare funds going toward overhead while private insurance spends 16-30% of its funds on overhead.
What % does the unemployment rate reach when you get rid of the insurance companies?
There will be no change because all those people will fill the healthcare provider jobs.
Regardless, I don't think this is really a valid argument for keeping health insurance companies around at the expense of our healthcare system, do you?
"Our assumption is that about three-quarters of other-than-legal immigrants pay payroll taxes," said Stephen C. Goss, Social Security's chief actuary, using the agency's term for illegal immigration.
http://www.nytimes.com/2005/04/05/busin ... ation.html
Well #1...your wrong. There will be a change, the unemployment % will go way down because we all know it takes 4 gov't workers to do the work of 1 non-gov't worker.
#2 - I was joking, hence the smiley. Don't get your panties in a bunch.
This current system sucks. A gov't run system sucks.
"Other than legal" What a f'in copout term. Don't wanna hurt the poor illegal immigrants feelings for breaking and entering the country.
"The United States raises significantly lower tax revenues as a percentage of gross domestic product than do
most other countries in the OECD."
http://www.taxpolicycenter.org/Uploaded ... -08-06.pdf
so just because one person you know has that opinion we all should ? :roll:
Of course not. I was just relating to Gern and I'm sure you know that. :roll:
But I do value the opinions of those who have lived under those systems (or, better yet, both systems) more so than those who want to hate on a system with which they have no experience.
Ya know... seriously... where do you people get this stuff from???