freedomdwarf1
Posts: 6845
Joined: 10/23/2012
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: RottenJohnny
quote:
ORIGINAL: freedomdwarf1
There's the difference you can't grasp... The doctor (and nursing staff), under a single payer system is told what he is getting paid as a fixed salary - s/he doesn't get to set the bill for their services. The same for meds, equipment, auxilliary staff, maintenance etc etc.
How is that different from what I said?
What you described was a different concept to single-payer.
All you did was not pay for insurance but instead paid for your healthcare directly.
From what you posted, the bill was almost halved if paid withing X days.
The difference is, single-payer starts at an even lower price - no profits in the price and probably subsidised.
quote:
ORIGINAL: RottenJohnny
quote:
Insurance companies have to make a profit or they go bust.
Ergo: charges are increased to pay dividends and high salaries and maintain profit margins.
Single-payer doesn't need to make a profit and they have no shareholders to pay off.
Governments are notoriously incapable of balancing budgets and saving money. Ergo, they continue to raise taxes, fees, and fines to pay for future debts. But it still equals more money out of your pocket.
I agree, never able to balance the books properly.
However, this is almost certainly due to fiscal cock-ups than money-grabbing greed for profits.
You posit that taxes fees and fines are raised to pay for said single-payer systems.
Our taxes have actually been lowered over the years.
Moreover, we don't have fees or fines - that is indicative of insurance-based systems, not single-payer.
quote:
ORIGINAL: RottenJohnny
quote:
They also, through sheer weight of size/numbers, are able to negotiate bigger discounts for equipment, meds and services.
Ergo: end results is better and cheaper for the same or better for the citizen.
Insurance companies do the same thing. But that can also be done in the private sector, perhaps through cooperative hospital groups or something similar. Around here, some doctors are working with the local Wal-Mart.
Then if they can do that, please explain why the US system is the most expensive in the world and yet only ranked #37 for performance??
As for some doctors colluding to help reduce costs, there's a huge chasm of difference between that and if the "collaboration" was national, incorporating all 200+ million adults of the US. The negotiated savings are colossal by comparison.
quote:
ORIGINAL: RottenJohnny
You can walk in and get some medications absolutely free. No government, no insurance company required.
Some meds... and in Walmart?
Try all meds, at every hospital, dispensing GP's, clinics and pharmacies.
And more recently, at almost every major supermarket outlet throughout the country.
quote:
ORIGINAL: RottenJohnny
Why is that an idea that is so unreasonable to pursue further?
quote:
No middle-men.
Sorry, FD. I just see that as more denial.
I see your vision as very limited and still run along the lines of profiteering greed.
My "denial", as you say, works in every country where they have single-payer systems.
They provide better care, better coverage, at a cheaper cost to the citizen... for life.
_____________________________
“If liberty means anything at all, it means the right to tell people what they do not want to hear.” George Orwell, 1903-1950
|
Taking Insurance Companies Out of Healthcare - 
Profile
New Messages
No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages
Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages
Locked w/o New Messages
Post New Thread