Health Insurance

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by brett05

Wonder what took you so long dbroncodini to use another invalid debate tactic? I know, working on your sorcery.

---

Prager U is a garbage source. I am under no obligation to treat them with even an iota of respect.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Hawkeye15

Oh, I am all for the private industry having contracts to make supplies. I am more so referring to the administration of healthcare itself. Every person should have access to healthcare, and the same healthcare. If there are options above and beyond basic provided healthcare, it can come at a cost. That way, if a child needs a kidney and the family has no money, the kid gets it, the family pays nothing. If a person wants a more comprehensive cancer treatment than Keytruda for example, then they have the ability to pay for it. Universal healthcare essentially makes sure no person is left behind, and promotes responsibility. I am in the boat that says, "if you smoked for 30 years, then you only have so much access to lung cancer treatment without having to pay some of it". That being said, I also know a 76 year old didn't know smoking was bad for them initially, and addiction is very tough to beat. So where is the line? Again, no system is perfect, but there should be coverage for all, with motivation to do the right thing sprinkled in there.

---

What you're describing sounds like a more fair system. It's what medicare for all tries to accomplish. It's not perfect by any means, but it does try to provide basic healthcare to everyone without the threat of massive debt/bankruptcy.

A major issue is that the GQP have convinced their supporters that this format will lead to all sorts of terrible things (wait times, doctors will suddenly become ****** and provide bad care, etc.). Despite evidence to the contrary, they'll scream about these imaginary awful things.

I also believe that there is another reason many GQP supporters don't want medicare for all, but they just keep (mostly) quiet about it. The GQP doesn't want non-white non-christian people to get the same things they do. Right now, they're convinced that they're better. Even if they make little money, live in a trailer, etc. they truly believe they are better. Having standardization eliminates this illusion.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by nyyfan555

What you're describing sounds like a more fair system. It's what medicare for all tries to accomplish. It's not perfect by any means, but it does try to provide basic healthcare to everyone without the threat of massive debt/bankruptcy.

A major issue is that the GQP have convinced their supporters that this format will lead to all sorts of terrible things (wait times, doctors will suddenly become ****** and provide bad care, etc.). Despite evidence to the contrary, they'll scream about these imaginary awful things.

I also believe that there is another reason many GQP supporters don't want medicare for all, but they just keep (mostly) quiet about it. The GQP doesn't want non-white non-christian people to get the same things they do. Right now, they're convinced that they're better. Even if they make little money, live in a trailer, etc. they truly believe they are better. Having standardization eliminates this illusion.

---

This part is very true. Look, at the end of the day, no healthcare system is perfect. But if we can get access to basic healthcare for as many people as possible, then give the option for additional healthcare at a cost to everyone, it at least provides the essentials to all.

The part that kills me, is current premiums and what you pay for literally the most basic service after coverage is applied, is SO expensive, that even a staunch supporter of privatized healthcare has to feel the current system is broken. We have nearly 30 million people with no access to healthcare in the US. That can't be the case. Most with healthcare need to make drastic decisions when a child cuts their heads, as it will cost them $600 to visit urgent care, and that is after coverage is applied.

What we have isn't working. Countries with universal healthcare have healthier populations, because BASIC needs are all accessible to their people.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by brett05

FTR I never said we can't improve healthcare in America.

And in Canada if you don't get stitches you still pay a massive bill, all in advance, in case you ever do need it.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9M0xPn07T8w
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9M0xPn07T8w

---

PragerU? :laugh2:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by brett05

Wonder what took you so long dbroncodini to use another invalid debate tactic? I know, working on your sorcery.

---

You continue to be achingly dumb and full of yourself.

Rather than being outright dismissive without checking, I decided to look into prager u

https://adfontesmedia.com/interactiv...ink_and_Button

They're quite biased, opinionated, and unreliable as a news source.

Also, i'm not sure about other people but I would be fine waiting a little longer in line for a non-emergent issue if it means I'm not going to owe some rich dude thousands of dollars for something that costs way less and can be covered by the government (who would currently rather spend billions on destroying other countries).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by brett05

I have not researched this, but isn't insurance mandatory thanks to the Obamacare? (I know they pay a penalty if they don't have coverage or did until President Trump)

People tend to be less responsible when it's free. Folks damage work stuff like laptops all the time because it's not theirs as an example. I don't want government telling someone if and when they can get a procedure done. (you abortion folks can sit this one out) That's a freedom I think most would not want to give up.

Giving universal coverage without the government intervention is better, but then it goes back to abuse. Why should my tax dollars pay for hearing loss of the driver in the car with the bass that can be heard 8 cars away at the stop light?

Should the Healthcare system be for profit? I think you ask a great question. I don't know if I have an opinion on it. I'd say I lean toward probably not.

---

First Bolded: Actually with healthcare it’s the opposite. When going to the doctor costs more money than you can afford, people generally don’t go as much. They don’t get as many checkups, don’t fix as many problems, etc. and their health deteriorates to where their condition is so bad it requires attention it costs far more than had they gone for the regular checkups (which usually they can’t pay and so those costs get passed on to everyone else).

There is a term for this in the medical community: preventative care. Countries with free healthcare are way better at preventative care because they go to the doctor for regular checkups and stuff more because they don’t have to worry about whether they can afford to do so.

Second Bolded: If you don’t think the system should be for profit, but you’re against universal healthcare. What system do you think would be best?

No thank you!

https://www.fraserinstitute.org/site...rance-2018.pdf

....from the creator of "iT's ThE fLu" comes one more rock solid medical opinion!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dbroncsinmo

No thank you!

https://www.fraserinstitute.org/site...rance-2018.pdf

---

This has to be a joke right? The costs Canadians pay for their healthcare they claim are so high literally pale in comparison to what the average person in the US spends on healthcare.

It should tell you something that Americans debate whether to switch to a Canadian healthcare model but no Canadian ever debates switching to an American healthcare model.

Just move to Canada if you hate America so much, valade.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Hawkeye15

Oh, I am all for the private industry having contracts to make supplies. I am more so referring to the administration of healthcare itself. Every person should have access to healthcare, and the same healthcare. If there are options above and beyond basic provided healthcare, it can come at a cost. That way, if a child needs a kidney and the family has no money, the kid gets it, the family pays nothing. If a person wants a more comprehensive cancer treatment than Keytruda for example, then they have the ability to pay for it. Universal healthcare essentially makes sure no person is left behind, and promotes responsibility. I am in the boat that says, "if you smoked for 30 years, then you only have so much access to lung cancer treatment without having to pay some of it". That being said, I also know a 76 year old didn't know smoking was bad for them initially, and addiction is very tough to beat. So where is the line? Again, no system is perfect, but there should be coverage for all, with motivation to do the right thing sprinkled in there.

---

I understand. I think one of the things you mentioned is basic care and then spoke of kidney replacement. Not sure that would be basic care.

I'd be in favor of you work you get insurance offered by your employer. That means any job. You deliver pizza, you get insurance. You work as a System Adminstrator, you get insurance. You are a Treasurer for a company, you get insurance.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dbroncos78087

Prager U is a garbage source. I am under no obligation to treat them with even an iota of respect.

---

Way to keep up with the illegal tactics. If it wasn't for that consistency I am not sure much of what you'd have.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by nyyfan555

What you're describing sounds like a more fair system. It's what medicare for all tries to accomplish. It's not perfect by any means, but it does try to provide basic healthcare to everyone without the threat of massive debt/bankruptcy.

A major issue is that the GQP have convinced their supporters that this format will lead to all sorts of terrible things (wait times, doctors will suddenly become ****** and provide bad care, etc.). Despite evidence to the contrary, they'll scream about these imaginary awful things.

I also believe that there is another reason many GQP supporters don't want medicare for all, but they just keep (mostly) quiet about it. The GQP doesn't want non-white non-christian people to get the same things they do. Right now, they're convinced that they're better. Even if they make little money, live in a trailer, etc. they truly believe they are better. Having standardization eliminates this illusion.

---

It's not the GOP that hates minorities with their policies. It's all you and the DNC from KKK to PP to AA.