The most important change we need to make - M4A or something like that

[MorkandMindy]

Arguably the most important decision that needs to be made is what to replace the crazy mixed private public charitable national state county medical care system we currently have, costing twice as much as any advanced nation's medical system and a hundred times more complicated, with.

Health insurance companies make billions in profit for playing no useful role in the system, complex but in no way helpful, and complex pie charts are published regularly that confuse people into thinking there is no alternative, even though every other wealthy country in the World is using an alternative, similar though with some differences, but somehow we remain paralyzed and bleeding to death.

 

[MorkandMindy]

Six percent according to a Pew Poll in mid 2020 are happy with the present debacle.

This situation is parallel to the daylight savings time debacle. Few want the time changing back and forth but about half want permanent summer time and half want permanent winter time so lacking an understanding of transferable voting we are left with something most people don't want.

The situation with medical care is more complex but not fundamentally different. Some want medicare for all, or medicaid for all, or believe that private healthcare actually exists and that they have it and want to keep it, but hardly anyone wants to keep wasting twice as much as the other advanced nations spend.

While there isn't an agreement on the replacement the healthcare industry is picking up a fortune for it's owners.

 

[MorkandMindy]

What's needed is a focus on the problem, it is more important than any other apart from immigration and global warming, but it could be solved very quickly.

One obstacle is the amount of wrong information out there. For example two people in one day told me that cancelling one new aircraft carrier would pay for the entire medical system for one year. The new aircraft carrier was 12.3 billion dollars, medical care for the country in 2019 was 3,800 billion.

Some of the health insurance companies made a lot more in profit alone than the aircraft carrier cost even after adding the planes.

 

[Pavel Mosko]

Leave the M4A Alone!

 

[Rene Loup]

While I completely agree with the concept of universal healthcare, may you provide links to sources for those statistics and claims? Please and thank you.

 

[d taylor]

Anyone do this.

Christian Healthcare Ministries | Healthcare cost sharing ministry

America is to large to say that a small country's health system will work in america. Corruption would run rampant

 

[Ringo84]

100%, OP. Private health care companies are parasites.

We also need a livable wage and universal basic income.
Ringo

 

[MorkandMindy]

Healthcare costs are also the deciding factor at the other end of the cost spectrum - the minimum wage.


I started work 5 years ago on 25c above minimum wage and that was good. A few years later the pay had gone up by 2 dollars an hour and I could no longer afford to work because I'd lost medicaid.

The company healthcare package was a good price because it is partly government supported, but still was enough to take away the pay increase, and I was 10 months away from the enrollment period...

How can anyone agree on any figure for the minimum wage until the healthcare costs are agreed?

 

[MorkandMindy]

While I completely agree with the concept of universal healthcare, may you provide links to sources for those statistics and claims? Please and thank you.

One starting point is that the public know the existing system is nuts but I'm not sure how anyone is ever going to get the government to agree.

 

[MorkandMindy]

It's a bit like asking the public if they want strawberry, chocolate or vanilla ice cream and when there isn't a clear majority for one of them just keep taking them the usual bowl of dirt.

 

[Rene Loup]

One starting point is that the public know the existing system is nuts but I'm not sure how anyone is ever going to get the government to agree.

View attachment 296255

Increasing share of Americans favor a single government program to provide health care coverage

Copy and paste the link, do not post only a screenshot. Doing it this way is much more convenient for the readers and shows respect towards them (Luke 6:31, 16:1-15, Matthew 7:12, 1 Peter 3:15-17).

Otherwise, they may think you have something to hide.

 

[MorkandMindy]

Anyone do this.

Christian Healthcare Ministries | Healthcare cost sharing ministry

America is to large to say that a small country's health system will work in america. Corruption would run rampant

I don't think size is a deciding factor, the population of the UK is about 66 million and has a system that works well. I don't know how many New Mexico Medicaid (Centennial Care) covers but the population is 2.1 million so the number in Centennial Care is less than that, and I've had a lot of dealings them and received different answers each time, so I'd say that system doesn't work very well.


The main problem I was told with one of the many systems here, and I think most of them are the same, is the system was designed by the health insurance industry primarily to benefit themselves (who else?) and other profiteers get a cut in the cash flow at various points too.

If you've looked at the documentation - I looked at SSA 1902 and SSA 1905 among others - I reached the conclusion the only option is to throw the existing system out in it's entirety and create something very simple and functional.

 

[d taylor]

I don't think size is a deciding factor, the population of the UK is about 66 million and has a system that works well. I don't know how many New Mexico Medicaid (Centennial Care) covers but the population is 2.1 million so the number in Centennial Care is less than that, and I've had a lot of dealings them and received different answers each time, so I'd say that system doesn't work very well.


The main problem I was told with one of the many systems here, and I think most of them are the same, is the system was designed by the health insurance industry primarily to benefit themselves (who else?) and other profiteers get a cut in the cash flow at various points too.

If you've looked at the documentation - I looked at SSA 1902 and SSA 1905 among others - I reached the conclusion the only option is to throw the existing system out in it's entirety and create something very simple and functional.

well 380+ million, i think will be much different. Plus then that is when (since the government is paying for it) will start to dictate your health/living choices.

Plus really what has this government ran successful. as the saying goes when someone does a half way job on a task, etc... People say its good enough for government work.

 

[mark46]

Ok, you, like Sanders want to remove private insurance companies from the system, and presumably monies from employers.

Your belief seems to to be that the US federal government will do a better job, and be more cost effective, as if the US government has been cost effective at running anything.

Healthcare in Germany - Wikipedia

Germany does much better. They pay for more in their taxes. They have more choices. However, there are private insurance companies as part of the mix, and employer are a critical part of the mix.
==================
The US has many issues in health insurance. We should be solving those problems, not creating a government boondoggle. I thought that we made that decision when the Clinton's proposed their plan.

Arguably the most important decision that needs to be made is what to replace the crazy mixed private public charitable national state county medical care system we currently have, costing twice as much as any advanced nation's medical system and a hundred times more complicated, with.

Health insurance companies make billions in profit for playing no useful role in the system, complex but in no way helpful, and complex pie charts are published regularly that confuse people into thinking there is no alternative, even though every other wealthy country in the World is using an alternative, similar though with some differences, but somehow we remain paralyzed and bleeding to death.

 

[MorkandMindy]

well 380+ million, i think will be much different. .

The group of people working on a particular task often has an optimum number which can be determined, I'd suggest perhaps 20. The task would be subdivided to get down to approximately that number. The UK NHS does not handle all 66 million in one region, it is divided in a pattern into fairly small pieces.

 

[MorkandMindy]

Ok, you, like Sanders want to remove private insurance companies from the system, and presumably monies from employers.

Your belief seems to to be that the US federal government will do a better job, and be more cost effective, as if the US government has been cost effective at running anything.

Healthcare in Germany - Wikipedia

Germany does much better. They pay for more in their taxes. They have more choices. However, there are private insurance companies as part of the mix, and employer are a critical part of the mix.
==================
The US has many issues in health insurance. We should be solving those problems, not creating a government boondoggle. I thought that we made that decision when the Clinton's proposed their plan.

There is a general misunderstanding that employers fund the private health schemes they offer. They pay about a quarter which is less than the added cost of all the administration and profiteering that sharing the cost generates. That is why it is cheaper to eliminate employer healthcare.

If people really want it they'll have to do a better job of paying for it

 

[mark46]

There is a general misunderstanding that employers fund the private health schemes they offer. They pay about a quarter which is less than the added cost of all the administration and profiteering that sharing the cost generates. That is why it is cheaper to eliminate employer healthcare.

If people really want it they'll have to do a better job of paying for it

You can continue to advocate for a UK system. There is little interest here. We will continue to have a mixed system as does much of Europe. What we need is to have universal access and for the system to run better. Does it run better in various countries in Europe? yes. We can learn from them.

 

[Vylo]

well 380+ million, i think will be much different. Plus then that is when (since the government is paying for it) will start to dictate your health/living choices.

Plus really what has this government ran successful. as the saying goes when someone does a half way job on a task, etc... People say its good enough for government work.

The size doesn't really matter. The EU is the size of the US and manages multiple universal healthcare systems at once.

 

[mark46]

The size doesn't really matter. The EU is the size of the US and manages multiple universal healthcare systems at once.

Yes, and some are insurance based. There are all kinds. Is it your point that it may be very reasonable to have state based systems, with some states grouping together? You don't seem to be arguing for one national system.

For example, I think that CA is quite capable of having a system with universal access. There might even be several choices.

 

[Vylo]

Yes, and some are insurance based. There are all kinds. Is it your point that it may be very reasonable to have state based systems, with some states grouping together? You don't seem to be arguing for one national system.

For example, I think that CA is quite capable of having a system with universal access. There might even be several choices.

You just need single payer. when the federal government negotiates on behalf of literally everyone at once, they have a lot of leverage to prevent overpricing.