Log in
Register
Search
Search titles only
By:
Search titles only
By:
Forums
New posts
Forum list
Search forums
Leaderboards
Games
Our Blog
Blogs
New entries
New comments
Blog list
Search blogs
Credits
Transactions
Shop
Blessings: ✟0.00
Tickets
Open new ticket
Watched
Donate
Log in
Register
Search
Search titles only
By:
Search titles only
By:
More options
Toggle width
Share this page
Share this page
Share
Reddit
Pinterest
Tumblr
WhatsApp
Email
Share
Link
Menu
Install the app
Install
Forums
Discussion and Debate
Discussion and Debate
Physical & Life Sciences
Universal Healthcare for all
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="RDKirk" data-source="post: 77054250" data-attributes="member: 326155"><p>Let me point out that the real discussion in the US is not about government-owned or government-supplied healthcare (which nobody with any real influence is seriously promoting), but rather government-insured health care. It's called "single-payer" healthcare in which the providers continue to be private agents but they are paid by the government rather than by a myriad of insurance companies. This is sometimes called "Medicare for All," Medicare being the current government payer for the healthcare of the elderly. I went on Medicare when I turned 65, and it's been pretty good. I also have a "Medicare Supplement" as part of my military retirement that covers medicine and anything Medicare doesn't cover.</p><p></p><p>Here is the seldom-discussed factor: The American insurance billing system is a billion-dollar industry. Companies that handle the incredibly complex and arcane system of medical insurance collect money every time they move a bill sideways multiple times between the provider and the insurance company (or companies) that pay the bill. Billions of dollars annually go nto the pockets of middlemen who do not a single thing to improve health care.</p><p></p><p>Going to a single-payer system with hospitals sending their bills directly to the government would put them all out of business overnight. Do you think they don't have lobbies in Congress?</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="RDKirk, post: 77054250, member: 326155"] Let me point out that the real discussion in the US is not about government-owned or government-supplied healthcare (which nobody with any real influence is seriously promoting), but rather government-insured health care. It's called "single-payer" healthcare in which the providers continue to be private agents but they are paid by the government rather than by a myriad of insurance companies. This is sometimes called "Medicare for All," Medicare being the current government payer for the healthcare of the elderly. I went on Medicare when I turned 65, and it's been pretty good. I also have a "Medicare Supplement" as part of my military retirement that covers medicine and anything Medicare doesn't cover. Here is the seldom-discussed factor: The American insurance billing system is a billion-dollar industry. Companies that handle the incredibly complex and arcane system of medical insurance collect money every time they move a bill sideways multiple times between the provider and the insurance company (or companies) that pay the bill. Billions of dollars annually go nto the pockets of middlemen who do not a single thing to improve health care. Going to a single-payer system with hospitals sending their bills directly to the government would put them all out of business overnight. Do you think they don't have lobbies in Congress? [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Discussion and Debate
Discussion and Debate
Physical & Life Sciences
Universal Healthcare for all
Top
Bottom