Prevention is the best medicine when it comes to avoiding surprise medical bills! Learn more.

 

Reply
Trusted Social Butterfly
1
Kudos
184
Views

70% Americans Agree

184 Views
Message 71 of 99

Unbelievable! How is Single Payer going to hurt the elderly? They already have a single payer system and they love it.

 

Competiton is great for the free market when it comes to commerce, but that's not always true for health care.

Report Inappropriate Content
1
Kudos
184
Views
Silver Conversationalist
0
Kudos
176
Views

Re: 70% Americans Agree

176 Views
Message 72 of 99

Competition is the only effective way to control Health Care cost.  Please remember Obama called a meeting with the insurance companies, this happened prior to Obama Care passing, to tell them how they would be receiving millions more requiring health insurance because of his mandate.  They believed him and most youth and healthy opted to pay the penalty.   I just really wish the people that want single payer (code for socialized medicine) would go to a country (they will not let you in to be a citizen just so you can get there socialized medicine) and live happily there.   Or maybe Bernie can go to Venezuela and fix the problems with their socialized medicine program.  some estimates are at 32 to 43 trillion dollars in ten years to pay for single payer.  France taxes its people at 70 percent and they are still running high debts like the UK.  Single payer and or socialized medicine is just crazy talk and these two plans will hurt the elderly the most.  Trump is getting the FDA to approve new medicines at a rate higher then ever before. 

Report Inappropriate Content
0
Kudos
176
Views
Valued Social Butterfly
0
Kudos
173
Views

Re: 70% Americans Agree

173 Views
Message 73 of 99

@Centristsin2010 wrote:

@GailL1 wrote:

 

 

My objection to a "Medicare for All" concept is that I see no effort to control health care cost under our present system and therefore wonder if it could ever be done under any health care system that would be derived. 

 

There's no greater way to "control costs" than to have a single payor.


Just having (1) entity as the major payers does not work in saving health care cost - other countries have proven that - they have to maintain control via negotiating, rules and processes by some assigned government or nonprofit entity(ies) they set up to set the standard levels of care and price.  Then they have to make sure that they keep down the annual cost.

 

Establishing a health care cost global budget is another way other countries keep their health care cost under control - some of our states are also trying it with programs and regulatory actions overwhich they have control  - mixed results, some better than others.

National Academy for State Health Policy January 2016 - Addressing and Reducing Health Care Costs in...

 

If you think that just removing the profit motive from insurance companies is the ticket to all of this - think twice because what we might save there will be spent two-fold on things like getting actual health care infrastructure to places that have none.  By educating more providers to fill the increase in demand, by establishing a network of more public serviceers, rather than the huge number of private servicers we have now.

 

Here is SB-562 The Healthy California Act.(2017-2018) passed in May 2017 - Today's Law As Amended

It is very interesting - seem to be planning it well - but again NO actual cost have been attached.

 

 

* * * * It's Always Something . . . Roseanne Roseannadanna
Report Inappropriate Content
0
Kudos
173
Views
Treasured Social Butterfly
2
Kudos
176
Views

Re: 70% Americans Agree

176 Views
Message 74 of 99

@GailL1 wrote:

 

 

My objection to a "Medicare for All" concept is that I see not effort to control health care cost under our present system and therefore wonder if it could ever be done under any health care system that would be derived. 

 

There's no greater way to "control costs" than to have a single payor.


"FAKE 45 #illegitimate" read a sign at the Woman's March in Washington DC, January 21, 2017.
Report Inappropriate Content
2
Kudos
176
Views
Valued Social Butterfly
0
Kudos
176
Views

Re: 70% Americans Agree

176 Views
Message 75 of 99

@umbarch64

 

The actual poll (of less than 3000 people) may have born the concept of "policy" within the poll but NO news media actually picked it up - find even one that included the concept or term of "policy" in their analysis of the poll - even the link that began this thread mentions "policy" only as a descriptive term in the concept of the actual poll.  Note the title and how others reporting this word their titles: 

Poll: Majority of Democrats and Republicans support Medicare for all

 

Yes, I agree and have already said that the total "concept" of Medicare for All needs to be defined before anyone can really understand its full meaning and thus be able to give a good decision about it. 

 

Policy development is all about bringing together information, data and all stakeholders.  Then through rigorous and objective assessment of data, hopefully based on scientific agreement or debated under such, perhaps a policy can be derived.

 

Before policy can become a reality - a fluid concept has to be designed - then, of course the policy has to be constantly reevaluated for workability, adaptability, etc.

 

I have also shown in my post here in this thread how science is sometimes overstepped by various special interest groups who can yell louder, in money or in deed, especially in our form of government. 

 

Setting a health care policy should be based on what works, what works for the least amount of money - it is not about ANYTHING regardless of want that is not scientific based.

 

My objection to a "Medicare for All" concept is that I see not effort to control health care cost under our present system and therefore wonder if it could ever be done under any health care system that would be derived.  I just want there to be some legitimate discussion on the concept - getting everybody on the same page about it for a real discussion and analysis - otherwise, polls like these mean little to nothing.

 

 

* * * * It's Always Something . . . Roseanne Roseannadanna
Report Inappropriate Content
0
Kudos
176
Views
Treasured Social Butterfly
1
Kudos
201
Views

Re: 70% Americans Agree

201 Views
Message 76 of 99

70% of Americans now support Medicare for All.

 

So let's inform everyone that Sen. Grassley suggests that they should put price tags on drugs.

I'm sure that will bring that 70% number down.

Report Inappropriate Content
1
Kudos
201
Views
Trusted Social Butterfly
0
Kudos
216
Views

Re: 70% Americans Agree

216 Views
Message 77 of 99

But, and this is a big, big "but," it's trending downward:

 

http://polling.reuters.com/#!response/TM1477Y18_1/type/smallest/dates/20170829-20180829/collapsed/tr...

 

and "the all time high" appears to be a lie.

Old Witch
Report Inappropriate Content
0
Kudos
216
Views
Valued Social Butterfly
0
Kudos
225
Views

Re: 70% Americans Agree

225 Views
Message 78 of 99

@MaVolta wrote:

@GailL1 - The whole point is that people are fed up with rising health care costs, big pharma and price gouging, and a Congress that does nothing to secure the future of anyone, other than themselves.

 

We want problem solvers in Congress who will work for the people and not the insurance companies, and certainly not big pharma. We want people in Congress who will strengthen Medicare and Medicaid, not bleed it to death.

 

Medicare for All is simply a term that implies universal coverage. People seem to favor universal coverage and being able to get health care without going broke. 

 


While I agree that cost are out of control - In my subsequent post I have given some example of how our cost also come from the US consumer and how it differs in other countries.

 

So when you are including insuers, hospital, providers, pharma - don't exclude the consumer too -

This has become learned behavior because we put so much value on just life rather than the more important QUALITY of life.  Our science should not be different from that in other countries but we add in public opinion and who can yell louder in our process. 

 

We have to come to terms with what will change and what and who will have the final word.

Yes, all treatment value has to be accepted and applied as a principal for any care - for anybody, unless they are paying out of pocket for it.

 

It is not of any value for an old or very sick person on death's door to be rushed to the hospital ER - but it happens everyday.  This is kinda old but change the numbers and the cost to higher and the scenario is the same.  CBS - 60 Minutes - The Cost of Dying

 

Good Grief - we can't even agree on a Woman's Right to Choose

We can't even give an adult the right to end their life with advance planning based on a quality of life scenario.

We have become a nation of demanders for healthcare - and the whole industry knows it and plays off of it - Pharma, Hospitals, Providers, Patient Advocate Groups -

 

Who wants to work at improving their total health when a pill or two will do.

Who wants to wait until they have lost weight for a knee replacement when they can have muliple ones since the failure rate is high for the obese.

Who wants to wait for an MRI (or whatever) when somebody else is paying for the millions of them we have in certain areas but NONE in others.

 

Yes, it is messed up but it is gonna take a whole lot more than just a bunch of tax money and what is covered to fix it.  We need a totally different way of thinking and making decisions about what actually is the best value in healthcare and then spread it around even to places that have none now.

 

 

* * * * It's Always Something . . . Roseanne Roseannadanna
Report Inappropriate Content
0
Kudos
225
Views
Valued Social Butterfly
4
Kudos
224
Views

Re: 70% Americans Agree

224 Views
Message 79 of 99

The question asked went like this:

 

Reuters/Ipsos, June and July 2018

 

Would you support or oppose the following?

 

A policy of Medicare for All?  (When it comes to the U.S. healthcare system)

 

"......................................................................................"

 

The published breakdown, sans any extraneous 'what abouts' or 'but ifs', followed. 

 

'Policy' was what the poll addressed.  Policy is a defined word. Look it up if you are ignorant of the actual meaning.  Websters Unabridged is a good authority, one that is used for legal documents.

 

Nothing was asked by the poll about anything else.  Not even one query regarding cost or any invitation to speculate whether or not anything was or was not 'affordable'.  Pretty straight forward question, I'd say.  Deseves a straight forward answer, wouldn't you say?  The results of that poll are in...the good folks that participated said what they thought.

 

So....Gail....you seem really, really reluctant to adopt the approach our founders took. Set the concept and policy and then set about accomplishing what they wanted to do.  I'm sure you passionately 'believe' you have valid reason to equivocate to advocate as you do.  I think I understand that.  What I have problems understanding is how in the world you think the approach you take to this matter can produce anything at all of lasting value.  Beats me. 

 

I am obliged to point out that dissembling to make a self serving political point to another is a lie in fact. IF one dissembles to oneself in order to reinforce a preconceived belief, that's intellectual dishonesty....of the worst kind really.  Why?  Because it prevents that self from seeing the truth and so be effective when dealing with that truth...or any other. 

 

Frankly I'm impressed by the command of details and depth of information you seem to have. I think you use all that in a seriously flawed manner. I think you do that deliberately and with purpose.

 

There has to be reason[s] a good person persists in mistaken belief[s] contrary to available evidence.  I can't see any that I can accept as valid.  none That's mis-use of a valuable resource. Themself.  It happens to be one of the non-renewalble kind.

 

When people can not or will not admit a demonstrated mistake and get on with making productive use of their lives, real problems arise. Just an observation.

 

 

 

  

Report Inappropriate Content
4
Kudos
224
Views
Valued Social Butterfly
0
Kudos
218
Views

Re: 70% Americans Agree

218 Views
Message 80 of 99

@williamb39198 wrote:

Who are we listening to?

-Rational discussions on bringing solutions to healthcare and controlling costs?

-Or lobbyists protecting the cash cow for drugs, insurance and healthcare costs?

Nothing is free. There needs to be ways to help pay for it. It’s not black and white. 

Other countries have figured out some solutions, why can’t we?

Have we lost our edge in solving problems, and providing solutions?

Or do we just listen to one side who really doesn’t give a hoot about others?

 

trump, BN, QE


It is more than just cost that other countries have figured out - they have a system of approval on medicines, procedures - price and benefits are included in their approval process.

 

Here is an example of something that is done here which is probably not tolerated in other countries based on benefit.

KHN - For Nursing Home Patients, Breast Cancer Surgery May Do More Harm Than Good

 

Then another example is the schedule of when women with normal factors begin testing - A few years ago the scientific community agreed that mannograms begin at age 50 - not 40.

On December 4, 2009, the USPSTF unanimously voted to update the language of their recommendation regarding women under 50 years of age to clarify their original and continued intent. 

 

Well, that hit the fan with women, cancer advocacy groups - so the USPTF backed down.

Here is the current coverage of things with a preventive rating as A or B - these are the things that were approved for Coverage with no out of pocket by the PPACA - see the "Breast Cancer Screening" for coverage and the footnote attached to it.

USPSTF A and B Recommendations

 

Here is the history:

USPSTF - Archived Recommendation Summary: Breast Cancer: Screening Original Release Date: November 2...

 

In the UK, invitations for screening are sent to women age 50 - 70

As the likelihood of getting breast cancer increases with age, all women aged 50 to 70 and registered with a GP are automatically invited for breast cancer screening every 3 years.

https://www.nhs.uk/conditions/breast-cancer-screening/

 

In Canada -

If you are 50 to 69 years old, have a screening mammography every 2 years.

If you are 40 to 49 years old, talk to your doctor about your risk for breast cancer, along with the benefits and limitations of mammography. The research isn’t clear about the benefits for women in their 40s.

If you are 70 or older, talk to your doctor about how often you should have a mammography.


In Denmark
Women between the ages of 50 and 69 living in Denmark are offered breast examinations every second year for early detection of breast cancer.

 

So in comparison

UK:  age 50 - 70 every 3 years

US   age 40 every 1 - 2 years

Ca   age 50 - 69 every 2 years

DK  age 50 - 69 every 2 years

 

This is just one example, I can give many more, but I think you see what I mean -

 

When you say lobbyist - you have to also include those lobbyist that fight for more benefits - sometimes things that are not covered in other countries - or not covered as medical in other countries - might be covered under education.  I.E. autism education

 

It is stuff like this, but not only,  that adds to our medical cost as a nation ( remember we have the highest in the world) as compared to other countries - there their government (acting for the taxpayers) speak loudly and definitively with science to back them up - if there is disagreement, the scientist/researchers fight it out - not the patient advocate and public opinion along with the MSM that we are denying somebody something..

 

* * * * It's Always Something . . . Roseanne Roseannadanna
Report Inappropriate Content
0
Kudos
218
Views
cancel
Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Did you mean: 
Users
Announcements

Have a question about AARP membership or benefits? Ask it in the AARP Help Membership forum, Benefits & Discounts forum, or General forum.


multiple white question marks with center red question mark

Top Authors