HealthCare

[fightinfrenchman]

yes it's type 1. To my knowledge he isn't, he's not, he's on a University provided health insurance plan as he used to be a professor. He takes insulin daily. Like I said, if you're a middle class person you will have good health insurance generally provided by your job, or that you pay for through your work. Our Healthcare system for middle class and rich people is just fine as middle class and rich people can easily afford good insurance. @spanky4ever middle class and upper class people in the US have good insurance, it's just poor people who are fucked.

The problem is many people who are ostensibly "middle class" don't have much in savings, so if they lose their main source of income they lose their good insurance, and can easily be overwhelmed if someone in the family gets sick.

[spanky4ever]

@gibson said ,

he's on a University provided health insurance plan as he used to be a professor.

that is an exempt, not the main stream man

[gibson]

@gibson said ,

he's on a University provided health insurance plan as he used to be a professor.

that is an exempt, not the main stream man

it's not any different than the plan my families on. The way my families plan works is we have I believe a 3000 deductible and after that our insurance pays for any medical expenses. @fightinfrenchman youre right

[spanky4ever]

how much do you pay for that, and for how many ppl? Im really curious to know @gibson

[gibson]

how much do you pay for that, and for how many ppl? Im really curious to know @gibson

No idea, it's through my dad's work, that's how most Healthcare plans are here. Your work pays for a lot of it.

[spanky4ever]

how much do you pay for that, and for how many ppl? Im really curious to know @gibson

No idea, it's through my dad's work, that's how most Healthcare plans are here. Your work pays for a lot of it.

Your right! and there are big corps going to make their own healt care insurance now. Think I showed this in a recently thread. The big corps are very dissatisfied about the way the cost are going - and to be frank, its kind of cracy (wouldnt you agree?)

[fightinfrenchman]

Yeah it should really be tied to your employer at all. Just makes losing your job even worse.

[WickedCossack]

yes it's type 1. To my knowledge he isn't, he's not, he's on a University provided health insurance plan as he used to be a professor. He takes insulin daily. Like I said, if you're a middle class person you will have good health insurance generally provided by your job, or that you pay for through your work. Our Healthcare system for middle class and rich people is just fine as middle class and rich people can easily afford good insurance. @spanky4ever middle class and upper class people in the US have good insurance, it's just poor people who are fucked.

It's good that his health insurance is covering a lot of the costs, I have no doubt that when you can afford it you can get respectable care.

[gibson]

Yea thats what I'm trying to say. Middle class and upper class people get fine treatment. Poor people get fucked.

[spanky4ever]

Yea thats what I'm trying to say. Middle class and upper class people get fine treatment. Poor people get fucked.

so - that would make you more inclined to keep you job? Cos switching, spesially if you have a medical issue, could leave you without a healt insurance? Make you "married" to the corporation and you have to take whatever they give you
I read alot of insurance companies not wanting to cover "pre-existing conditions"?

[WickedCossack]

Yea thats what I'm trying to say. Middle class and upper class people get fine treatment. Poor people get fucked.

Sure.

I think I would still argue that the cost of the healthcare is still too high due to leaving the system up to the markets, so yes even though you can afford it (making it not a huge deal) you still are technically paying significantly more than you need to under a more regulated system. Plus the quality of healthcare in America for just those that can afford it is still rated lower than the quality of healthcare provided in other high income countries, but sure it's still at a very good level to the point where as a citizen you wouldn't really care too much.

[spanky4ever]

I'm not in favor of public healthcare
.

What is that a typo or just the new you

[Gendarme]

Hopefully the new Jeröm. That sentence gave me hope!

[lejend]

This is why I always get drawn into discussions on healthcare so easily when I see how badly people with the same condition I have treated so poorly in a 1st world country.

That explains your passion about this. A guy I watch on YouTube occasionally, a fairly smart and reasonable guy, his son suffers from frequent seizures, and he has to pay for treatment by himself, since he is self-employed as a YouTube personality. Maybe he has insurance, maybe he deosn't. Maybe he has ObamaCare. He seems to struggle due to it, but I don't know.

He once posted a political compass thing that showed him to be a pretty laissez-faire, live-and-let-live type of person, so he isn't exactly a communist, but he also supported universal health coverage. I think he just wants a system that works for him, and since the current system isn't, he reasons that he has nothing to lose by trying something different.

I can see why my comments might seem careless and out of touch to you. But I'm only saying, that while some have nothing to lose, most people have a lot to lose if overhauling the entire health care system goes wrong. That's why I wanted a dispassionate, fact-based discussion about the health care system, without personal attacks, emotional appeals, or random anecdotes that we can't really rebut due to lack of information. That's how most discussions about health care go and it's not productive.

But I agree I'm at fault due to not replying to your earlier arguments. Don't worry I will. I have the post mostly prepared. Just putting finishing touches on it.

Yeah. I agree with you on this one. cos Obama care is not really a public healtcare. It was originally a Republican bill!! The prices skyrocketing, are the result.

Your claim on endless waitinglist, are very wrong though. For smaller, not importaint for your survival, yeah I guess those could have a waitinglist.

This video should open your eyes though, if you care to take a look

phpBB [video]

Can't watch the video right now but the description has some truth to it.

[thomasgreen6]

Yea thats what I'm trying to say. Middle class and upper class people get fine treatment. Poor people get fucked.

Why would you want a healtcare system where certain people are priced out?

[gibson]

Yea thats what I'm trying to say. Middle class and upper class people get fine treatment. Poor people get fucked.

Sure.

I think I would still argue that the cost of the healthcare is still too high due to leaving the system up to the markets, so yes even though you can afford it (making it not a huge deal) you still are technically paying significantly more than you need to under a more regulated system. Plus the quality of healthcare in America for just those that can afford it is still rated lower than the quality of healthcare provided in other high income countries, but sure it's still at a very good level to the point where as a citizen you wouldn't really care too much.

one could argue its more expensive due to lower taxes, but I don't really want to cause I'm in favor if a single payer system.

@thomasgreen6 Im not in favor of it, I'm in favor of a single payer system, I'm just trying to dispell the myth that American Healthcare is horrible for everyone.

[thomasgreen6]

Yea thats what I'm trying to say. Middle class and upper class people get fine treatment. Poor people get fucked.

Sure.

I think I would still argue that the cost of the healthcare is still too high due to leaving the system up to the markets, so yes even though you can afford it (making it not a huge deal) you still are technically paying significantly more than you need to under a more regulated system. Plus the quality of healthcare in America for just those that can afford it is still rated lower than the quality of healthcare provided in other high income countries, but sure it's still at a very good level to the point where as a citizen you wouldn't really care too much.

one could argue its more expensive due to lower taxes, but I don't really want to cause I'm in favor if a single payer system.

@thomasgreen6 Im not in favor of it, I'm in favor of a single payer system, I'm just trying to dispell the myth that American Healthcare is horrible for everyone.

Ah ok I think you could argue that there are advantages of both, although I agree that a single payer system like we have in the UK is better overall. True although I think from what I've read the amount of Tax we pay in the UK is similar to the amount people pay in the US for insurance etc as a % of your total income.

[WickedCossack]

one could argue its more expensive due to lower taxes, but I don't really want to cause I'm in favor if a single payer system.

Just to clarify you realise that America spends more on public healthcare per capita than the UK?

So not only do you pay more taxes than I do on healthcare you have to pay in addition i) for insurance and ii) for the actual healthcare.

@thomasgreen6 figures from 2013 show the US spends $4,197 per capita and the UK $2,802 on public healthcare http://uk.businessinsider.com/us-spends-more-public-money-on-healthcare-than-sweden-or-canada-2017-4?r=US&IR=T

That doesn't include insurance or the actual healthcare.

[thomasgreen6]

one could argue its more expensive due to lower taxes, but I don't really want to cause I'm in favor if a single payer system.

Just to clarify you realise that America spends more on public healthcare per capita than the UK?

So not only do you pay more taxes than I do on healthcare you have to pay in addition i) for insurance and ii) for the actual healthcare.

@thomasgreen6 figures from 2013 show the US spends $4,197 per capita and the UK $2,802 on public healthcare http://uk.businessinsider.com/us-spends-more-public-money-on-healthcare-than-sweden-or-canada-2017-4?r=US&IR=T

That doesn't include insurance or the actual healthcare.

Is this the total spend of the average citizen on thier helathcare? Or the amount the government pays? I couldn't work it out from the report.

[gibson]

one could argue its more expensive due to lower taxes, but I don't really want to cause I'm in favor if a single payer system.

Just to clarify you realise that America spends more on public healthcare per capita than the UK?

So not only do you pay more taxes than I do on healthcare you have to pay in addition i) for insurance and ii) for the actual healthcare.

@thomasgreen6 figures from 2013 show the US spends $4,197 per capita and the UK $2,802 on public healthcare http://uk.businessinsider.com/us-spends-more-public-money-on-healthcare-than-sweden-or-canada-2017-4?r=US&IR=T

That doesn't include insurance or the actual healthcare.

I guess thats what happens when your country feels the need to spend half a trillion dollars on military each year. Sucks.

[WickedCossack]

Is this the total spend of the average citizen on thier helathcare? Or the amount the government pays? I couldn't work it out from the report.

Per capita is the average per person. Public healthcare spending per capita is essentially (for the average citizen) how much of your taxes get spent on healthcare.

For the UK that's our healthcare, you're covered for anything. For an American unless you are lucky enough to qualify for a program you don't get to see a return on your $4,197 (except for access), a large portion just gets spent on admin iirc propping up insurance companies. So they have to pay a private company for the actual healthcare they need which would come under private healthcare spending per capita.

If you want the total spend you have to add both private and public together.

[WickedCossack]

But I agree I'm at fault due to not replying to your earlier arguments. Don't worry I will. I have the post mostly prepared. Just putting finishing touches on it.

Tis over a week later now, how is it going?

If you've lost motivation you can post the bit you had written, I'd still be interested.

[Goodspeed]

Free market healthcare doesn't work for a very simple reason. It's so simple that I legitimately do not understand why this is still up for debate.
- Patents
- Inelastic demand

When a company discovers a drug that treats a certain disease, they patent it. No other company can now sell this drug. And since the demand is often completely inelastic, nothing except the government (or, haha, basic humanity) could stop them from increasing the price. From a business perspective it's the easiest decision ever.

Watch episode 3 of "Dirty money". It features a company, Valeant, whose strategy was simply buying up other pharma companies, gutting their R&D departments and simply jacking up the prices of their existing drugs by insane amounts. The initial success of their strategy illustrates the problem.

[Gendarme]

You cannot have a free market with patents. Patents are among the heaviest forms of regulation. Your definition of a free market seems to be very twisted.

[Goodspeed]

You cannot have a free market with patents. Patents are among the heaviest forms of regulation. Your definition of a free market seems to be very twisted.

And your idea of a free market is laughably idealistic. No one, especially in health care, would ever invest in R&D if any discovery you make would immediately be copied by all of your competitors.