Consensus emerging on universal healthcare - but single payer is off the table

[one...two...tree 2,762]

We get into this circular argument over the cost of a single payer system over and over. It's really simple math. If the current cost per American for health care is higher than any of the industrialized nations who have national healthcare and we can provide universal coverage for all Americans at a significantly lower cost, then I don't understand the fuss. Whether your paycheck is being deducted for insurance premiums or for a special tax that pays for a single payer system, all the data shows is that it will be less money out of our pockets.

Presumably all those "socialist" countries have less corrupt/inept government than the US does.

I don't believe that either

Well maybe their healthcare systems are #######? I'd take my PPO plan over the NHS any day.

The argument seems to meander from cost to quality of care....but on both fronts, the statistics weigh in favor of a single payer system.

The World Health Organization ranks the quality of care in the U.S. at 37.

1 France

2 Italy

3 San Marino

4 Andorra

5 Malta

6 Singapore

7 Spain

8 Oman

9 Austria

10 Japan

11 Norway

12 Portugal

13 Monaco

14 Greece

15 Iceland

16 Luxembourg

17 Netherlands

18 United Kingdom

19 Ireland

20 Switzerland

21 Belgium

22 Colombia

23 Sweden

24 Cyprus

25 Germany

26 Saudi Arabia

27 United Arab Emirates

28 Israel

29 Morocco

30 Canada

31 Finland

32 Australia

33 Chile

34 Denmark

35 Dominica

36 Costa Rica

37 United States of America

http://www.photius.com/rankings/healthranks.html

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

We get into this circular argument over the cost of a single payer system over and over. It's really simple math. If the current cost per American for health care is higher than any of the industrialized nations who have national healthcare and we can provide universal coverage for all Americans at a significantly lower cost, then I don't understand the fuss. Whether your paycheck is being deducted for insurance premiums or for a special tax that pays for a single payer system, all the data shows is that it will be less money out of our pockets.

Presumably all those "socialist" countries have less corrupt/inept government than the US does.

I don't believe that either

Well maybe their healthcare systems are #######? I'd take my PPO plan over the NHS any day.

The argument seems to meander from cost to quality of care....but on both fronts, the statistics weigh in favor of a single payer system.

The World Health Organization ranks the quality of care in the U.S. at 37.

1 France

2 Italy

3 San Marino

4 Andorra

5 Malta

6 Singapore

7 Spain

8 Oman

9 Austria

10 Japan

11 Norway

12 Portugal

13 Monaco

14 Greece

15 Iceland

16 Luxembourg

17 Netherlands

18 United Kingdom

19 Ireland

20 Switzerland

21 Belgium

22 Colombia

23 Sweden

24 Cyprus

25 Germany

26 Saudi Arabia

27 United Arab Emirates

28 Israel

29 Morocco

30 Canada

31 Finland

32 Australia

33 Chile

34 Denmark

35 Dominica

36 Costa Rica

37 United States of America

http://www.photius.com/rankings/healthranks.html

That is pretty damning.

[Chica Yeyé 41]

Nice list hermano Steve

[mawilson 2,133]

The World Health Organization ranks the quality of care in the U.S. at 37.

That list is total BS.

They probably consider the "average" quality of care, which includes 45 million people who receive no healthcare at all.

[HAL 9000 96]

The World Health Organization ranks the quality of care in the U.S. at 37.

That list is total BS.

They probably consider the "average" quality of care, which includes 45 million people who receive no healthcare at all.

Of course. If they had coverage... then the "average" is itself skewed upwards.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

The World Health Organization ranks the quality of care in the U.S. at 37.

That list is total BS.

They probably consider the "average" quality of care, which includes 45 million people who receive no healthcare at all.

What's wrong with that? If 45 million people don't have access to healthcare - they have no quality of care.

Its all well and good decrying the quality of a product, but if people don't have access to it - its not going to do them any good!

[chri'stina 190]

Things that make you go hmmmm.

[chri'stina 190]

If there's universal healthcare, we should exclude everyone over 70. We should decide, as a nation, that people over 70 aren't worth saving.

Or at least that poor people over 70 aren't worth saving.

Those who have accomplished something and have a nice retirement account can pay for it themselves.

I agree. If there's anything more pathetic than a poor person, it's an old poor person.

Note to self: Deny saying this when you're poor.

Poor people in general piss me off. I don't mind the ones that are trying to make their life better but the ones who just think they are entitled to all of this free sh*t really piss me off. They deserve to die miserable and poor without free healthcare.

What about rich people who act like they are entitled to free stuff? I don't even know if what you wrote was supposed to be sarcastic or not, so I'll just hold my tongue about the rest. I don't like saying outrageous insensitive things.

Edited December 2, 2008 by Parivar CSK

[HAL 9000 96]

If there's universal healthcare, we should exclude everyone over 70. We should decide, as a nation, that people over 70 aren't worth saving.

Or at least that poor people over 70 aren't worth saving.

Those who have accomplished something and have a nice retirement account can pay for it themselves.

I agree. If there's anything more pathetic than a poor person, it's an old poor person.

Note to self: Deny saying this when you're poor.

Poor people in general piss me off. I don't mind the ones that are trying to make their life better but the ones who just think they are entitled to all of this free sh*t really piss me off. They deserve to die miserable and poor without free healthcare.

What about rich people who act like they are entitled to free stuff?

Certainly some of those. Care to elaborate sister?

[chri'stina 190]

If there's universal healthcare, we should exclude everyone over 70. We should decide, as a nation, that people over 70 aren't worth saving.

Or at least that poor people over 70 aren't worth saving.

Those who have accomplished something and have a nice retirement account can pay for it themselves.

I agree. If there's anything more pathetic than a poor person, it's an old poor person.

Note to self: Deny saying this when you're poor.

Poor people in general piss me off. I don't mind the ones that are trying to make their life better but the ones who just think they are entitled to all of this free sh*t really piss me off. They deserve to die miserable and poor without free healthcare.

What about rich people who act like they are entitled to free stuff?

Certainly some of those. Care to elaborate sister?

LOL, Nah bro.

[HAL 9000 96]

If there's universal healthcare, we should exclude everyone over 70. We should decide, as a nation, that people over 70 aren't worth saving.

Or at least that poor people over 70 aren't worth saving.

Those who have accomplished something and have a nice retirement account can pay for it themselves.

I agree. If there's anything more pathetic than a poor person, it's an old poor person.

Note to self: Deny saying this when you're poor.

Poor people in general piss me off. I don't mind the ones that are trying to make their life better but the ones who just think they are entitled to all of this free sh*t really piss me off. They deserve to die miserable and poor without free healthcare.

What about rich people who act like they are entitled to free stuff?

Certainly some of those. Care to elaborate sister?

LOL, Nah bro.

* COMPUTERZIED LOL *

I hear you... and I think I completely understand where you are coming from.

[rocks 494]

What about rich people who act like they are entitled to free stuff? I don't even know if what you wrote was supposed to be sarcastic or not, so I'll just hold my tongue about the rest. I don't like saying outrageous insensitive things.

best not to get into it eh?

[one...two...tree 2,762]

The World Health Organization ranks the quality of care in the U.S. at 37.

That list is total BS.

They probably consider the "average" quality of care, which includes 45 million people who receive no healthcare at all.

But that brings the argument back to cost. You and are paying more than our counterparts in other industrialized countries for our healthcare because there are 45 million without healthcare. Radical concept I know, but it would be cheaper to cover all Americans than what we are paying now.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

Well unless I misunderstand the rationale - I would guess that presumably the rich people's quality of care would go down...

In practice of course it wouldn't - many countries that have publicly funded healthcare programmes also have supplemental insurance and there are many private healthcare companies that offer "premium" care.

[HAL 9000 96]

The World Health Organization ranks the quality of care in the U.S. at 37.

That list is total BS.

They probably consider the "average" quality of care, which includes 45 million people who receive no healthcare at all.

But that brings the argument back to cost. You and are paying more than our counterparts in other industrialized countries for our healthcare because there are 45 million without healthcare. Radical concept I know, but it would be cheaper to cover all Americans than what we are paying now.

And not just coverage... but actual quality care.