Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

Pruedrive t1_j6yov8z wrote

I mean.. the goverment could move to a single payer universal healthcare system, like the rest of the industrial world.. then they can set the prices.

145

JustADudeBeingADood t1_j6yq5a1 wrote

Hey I'm all for that too. Literally anything than the corporate greed infested healthcare system we have now.

64

Pruedrive t1_j6yqim8 wrote

The way we pay for Healthcare is fucking ridiculous, and let's face it, it's pretty ghoulish companies profiting off of people's illnesses.

55

Adventurous-Aide664 t1_j6za919 wrote

Exactly, for profit health insurance is a scam. Their only goal is to maximize profits for their shareholders, so that means they do all they can to avoid paying for care.

The system in other countries is much simpler because there are way fewer payers, sometimes only one and the goal of that agency is not to make profits.

Here we have thousands of middlemen that siphon off our money into their pockets while producing little to nothing of value and making everyone's lives more complicated.

By the way, the top 6 health insurance CEOs made $115 million last year. Just six people siphoned off over 100 million that could have gone to paying for healthcare. Disgusting

25

Strat7855 t1_j6zj4bj wrote

Take it a step further; insurance should be for things that may happen. That's what the entire business model is supposed to be based on.

But everyone gets sick/injured at some point. There's no "may" about it.

10

Educated_Eel t1_j6zdyrv wrote

Am doctor. completely agree. Great recent JAMA article on the subject. https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/fullarticle/2801097

11

supermomfake t1_j71jde5 wrote

Nurse and case manager- left because my job kept becoming about “saving” money instead of caring for patients.

2

[deleted] t1_j6zdxln wrote

[deleted]

4

BobbyBuzz008 t1_j6zvugp wrote

That’s not entirely accurate. Connecticut did have a public option healthcare plan called the Charter Oak Health Plan. Every adult in CT could join and your premium was on a sliding scale based on your income. Governor Malloy killed the public option back in 2011 as he knew the CT Access Health insurance exchange couldn’t complete with it.

https://www.ct.gov/GovernorRell/cwp/view.asp?Q=422194

2

[deleted] t1_j72n19v wrote

[deleted]

3

Pruedrive t1_j72n8uw wrote

I wouldn’t use them as a comparison.. they have cut themselves off from the international community with brexit and our economy far surpasses theirs.

1

[deleted] t1_j72okux wrote

[deleted]

1

Pruedrive t1_j72rkkt wrote

I wouldn’t use Canada as an analogue either if we are being honest… they have a population smaller than CA. And you really can’t let the perfect be the enemy of the good.

1

[deleted] t1_j72trid wrote

[deleted]

1

Pruedrive t1_j73286h wrote

There really aren't any peers that are scaleable.. or appropriate. That said though a whole host of other nations with nowhere near the same economic might as ours have figured it out.. surely we can. Also part of it probably will be a focus on preventative care.. tons of people would benefit from getting just annual checkups, more so when a medical professional tells them to put down the fork and do something healthy for a change.

0

TreeEleben t1_j72b5a9 wrote

All medical industry spends a fortune every year on campaign donations. They are terrified of the government stepping in.

2

Pruedrive t1_j72c35x wrote

Which should be the gold standard for.. this will probably help the broad range of us, while effecting the pockets of the wealthy.. ergo it must be good.

1

Crombienator t1_j71trg4 wrote

First, the system absolutely needs to be fixed, and you do have greedy people abusing the system for profit no doubt. Second, there seems to be a massive misunderstanding about the difference between coverage and care. Simply erasing the fiscal woes in healthcare in no way guarantees universal "care." What good is having affordable insurance(or even free) when you have few doctors willing to participate in the government telling them what to charge, how much they can make, and what care they HAVE to provide. Is every doctor equal? Do they have the exact same qualifications? Do they all try the same? Do they all care the same? Pretending there aren't massive issues with the rest of the "industrial world" is just foolish.

1

Pruedrive t1_j71uys8 wrote

I’m not sure how many people go into the medical field solely for financial gain… I would hope medical professionals are there cause they want to help people first and foremost. If this dissuades people from that line of work because, the government steps in and says, hey you really shouldn’t be making people go into debt for the rest of their lives, over circumstances that often are outside of their control just because you can.. well then fuck fuck those people. What’s even the point to having a Hippocratic Oath, if you are going to put a financial barrier between you and your patients. Now understand, I’m all for medical professionals being well paid.. but we pay stupid amounts for our healthcare in this country that a multitude of our other peer nations don’t, and there are huge factors to that, mainly how we pay for our healthcare.

1

Crombienator t1_j71wrdx wrote

The best doctors in the world aren’t gonna work 60 hours a week for cheese. Can’t they care, and want to make a good living for there time and investment?

0

shotpun t1_j73ws60 wrote

teachers are literally doing that right now and have been since the 80s

1

Crombienator t1_j77zr1r wrote

With all respect to teachers. These two not even in the same stratosphere for comparison.

1

D-a-H-e-c-k t1_j6z8dha wrote

At the state level sure. Don't agree with a national single payer health plan. Perhaps a federal network and framework, but I don't trust the Fed to manage such a service properly

−12

maybe_little_pinch t1_j6zfvu8 wrote

Eh. But then you will have red states refusing it and gutting it like they did with the Medicaid expansion. This whole “the states do it better” schlock needs to die when it comes to stuff like human rights. Healthcare is a human right.

11

RWMach t1_j7137q3 wrote

The bigger issue I see is that no state even ATTEMPTS to implement a system like that in their own state. States like CT, NY and CA say it's such a good idea and the only way forward Yada Yada, but that never try making a state system despite every republican in the federal system saying it should be up to the states.

Well, if it's up to the states and no state implements anything, what does that say?

4

D-a-H-e-c-k t1_j6zh0b7 wrote

No one has rights to other people's labor.

The closer the government the more accountable to its constituents. State level healthcare is on the same population scale as most other healthcare systems around the world.

To get right down to it I'd rather just have it at the municipal level.

0

blumpkinmania t1_j6zmu56 wrote

That cant work because poor and sick people will just move to places that have universal care and bankrupt those places. It must be national.

−3

D-a-H-e-c-k t1_j6zpeeq wrote

Property values will accommodate demand.

−4

blumpkinmania t1_j700437 wrote

Yeah. I’m not sure keeping the poor and sick out by turbo charging already high housing costs is a viable let alone desirable idea.

1

D-a-H-e-c-k t1_j709vsr wrote

That's a separate issue. Same with education. Housing values follow school performance.

−1

Pruedrive t1_j6za8qw wrote

Sure there is a lot of distrust but the federal goverment is perfectly capable of running large agency's and programs, as long as they properly fund them and give them enough autonomy to do their own thing. Can't let the perfect be the enemy of the good.

9

shotpun t1_j73wosj wrote

imagine how fucking horrible the USPS would be if you made it a state by state thing. some things just need to be able to communicate internally on a national scale

0