single payer healthcare moving forward in VT

Page 3 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

Nebor

Lifer
Jun 24, 2003
29,582
12
76
He costs much more then this. He's not a general practice guy.

What's your point? I'm saying anyone can get access to a private doctor who went to a top 10 medical school for less than $50,000 a year. Not just the "mega wealthy." These doctors make more money than their public practice counterparts and have to deal with far less paperwork and hassle.
 

JSt0rm

Lifer
Sep 5, 2000
27,399
3,948
126
Working at a participating institution and not treating all comers as required by law. Again name?

Thats a research hospital. He isnt working in the emergency room. He gets massive grants from the nih to do research and in turn the hospital gets loads of money from him. Anyone who shows up to the emergency room gets care.

No names. My roommate used to work for one of his colleagues (thats how I began to understand exactly how it works at the top) and is still in the industry so I wont let that out.
 

JSt0rm

Lifer
Sep 5, 2000
27,399
3,948
126
anyways my point is the rich get private care regardless of the insurance us peasants carry - single payer or not.
 

JSt0rm

Lifer
Sep 5, 2000
27,399
3,948
126
What's your point? I'm saying anyone can get access to a private doctor who went to a top 10 medical school for less than $50,000 a year. Not just the "mega wealthy." These doctors make more money than their public practice counterparts and have to deal with far less paperwork and hassle.

Sorry just saw this. Yes we are in agreement. The upper crust will always be serviced by these private doctors. Neocons and republicans need not fret about the health care of the rich. They will be protected.
 

Zebo

Elite Member
Jul 29, 2001
39,398
19
81
anyways my point is the rich get private care regardless of the insurance us peasants carry - single payer or not.

Yes. In UK rich have private doctors too.

I am in agreement with single payer from what I've seen it's 1/2-1/3 cost and service is good. But it won't work on a state by state basis as explained by many and it won't work without addressing costs.

Obama's plan is also a complete joke. By making people buy insurance that increases the demand side and like very first rule in business school is you raise prices when you have more demand than you can handle. (which they already do let alone if 40 million more come online)
 

werepossum

Elite Member
Jul 10, 2006
29,873
463
126
http://www.cedars-sinai.edu/

There is a doctor at this hospital that will on accept cash for treatment. A lot of cash. Only the mega wealthy get to see him. His situation will not change no matter what type of health care plan in implemented. You will find these types of doctors near the very wealthy. Exceptional at what they do to the point that they only need to accept the highest amount of money. You, werepossum from yeehawdy dooville will never ever get this type of healthcare.
Nor would I expect it. My own insurance is a health savings account, with a catastrophic BCBS policy on top, so I too pay my own money (just at a much more modest scale) for my own health care. My point though was something like Hillarycare, that makes it illegal to pay for your own health care. Vermont is a very liberal state, and liberals tend to regard their own ideas as so good that they exclusively must be enforced by the armed might of government. If Vermont implements single payer that forces the wealthy to wait in line with the indigent for health care, then the wealthy will leave, or at least those who aren't really dedicated socialists. (One would strongly suspect that most truly wealthy people are not dedicated socialists, at least where their own wealth, comfort and convenience is concerned.) If Vermont implements single payer that does not force the wealthy to wait in line with the indigent for health care, then the wealthy might or might not leave, depending on what it does to taxes, the business environment, and how they perceive its effects on them personally.
 

JSt0rm

Lifer
Sep 5, 2000
27,399
3,948
126
My point though was something like Hillarycare, that makes it illegal to pay for your own health care.

see you always say stuff like this. I'm not saying you are wrong but you gotta back up a statement like that.
 

werepossum

Elite Member
Jul 10, 2006
29,873
463
126
see you always say stuff like this. I'm not saying you are wrong but you gotta back up a statement like that.
Are you specifically denying that Hillarycare would have made it illegal to pay for your own health care, or merely asserting that this won't happen in Vermont?
 

JSt0rm

Lifer
Sep 5, 2000
27,399
3,948
126
Are you specifically denying that Hillarycare would have made it illegal to pay for your own health care, or merely asserting that this won't happen in Vermont?

I'm saying that its pretty ridiculous to think that Hillary care stopped anyone from buying ADDITIONAL healthcare. Would you like to prove your statement? Or was it just another half truth concocted to solidify your position?
 

Hayabusa Rider

Admin Emeritus & Elite Member
Jan 26, 2000
50,879
4,268
126
Is that worst then ever inflating healthcare costs? Also is replacing healthcare spending with taxes to pay for healthcare less expensive? most think yes.

Is like the same argument always comes from the pro-health as profit crowd.

Health care costs will continue to escalate. With an aging population there is no way to avoid it. If you look at the US vs the world, we're several places from the top in terms of the rate in increase of care. Yes, those are UHC countries. As far as costs go I can tell you that medicaid is very very expensive. It's killing us in NY and there's nothing even close to universal coverage. Expanding it to everyone would exceed our entire tax revenue.

If the argument is that it's good because everyone is covered I'll buy that. If you thing there are going to be profound savings you are naive.

We'll just see how this shakes out. Worst case is it's a disaster and we can do forensics on their system. Maybe they'll get it to work. In any event they are being valuable lab rats for the rest of us.
 

Zebo

Elite Member
Jul 29, 2001
39,398
19
81
I dont even see us being able to afford medicaid let alone medicare. System should break in a couple five years when boomer start really coming online
 

Hayabusa Rider

Admin Emeritus & Elite Member
Jan 26, 2000
50,879
4,268
126
I dont even see us being able to afford medicaid let alone medicare. System should break in a couple five years when boomer start really coming online

Once the system is in place it's there forever. What will happen is that taxes will continually rise to compensate. At some point in the next 20 to 30 years health care in all nations will probably exceed all other programs combined. Of course once the Boomers die things will improve markedly.
 

JSt0rm

Lifer
Sep 5, 2000
27,399
3,948
126
Once the system is in place it's there forever. What will happen is that taxes will continually rise to compensate. At some point in the next 20 to 30 years health care in all nations will probably exceed all other programs combined. Of course once the Boomers die things will improve markedly.

How is that different then insurance rates increasing? Except the fact that we can save .10 on the dollar outright in insurance company bureaucracy and with having records electronic we dont have to have the same tests performed over and over again. Thats not rationed care it just makes sense. I know to those who work in the health industry they want to see tests needed forever about everything but thats just not gonna be how we will do things in the future.
 

werepossum

Elite Member
Jul 10, 2006
29,873
463
126
I'm saying that its pretty ridiculous to think that Hillary care stopped anyone from buying ADDITIONAL healthcare. Would you like to prove your statement? Or was it just another half truth concocted to solidify your position?

You totally missed that part of the debate in '93/'94? M'kay . . .

From the original published Health Security Act, check out page 947. The punishment for buying or selling any covered medical services outside the plan - a federal felony - is a civil penalty in an amount not to exceed $50,000 and a minimum of 5 years in prison. If something normally covered - say, a hip replacement - is turned down for you, and you pay a doctor with your own money for that service, you have both committed a felony. If you simply want to pay to avoid the waiting, you and your doctor have both committed a felony. There's another little beauty too about paying for unauthorized medical services, also a felony. One of the things that killed Hillarycare was the many ways it could send you to prison for seeking to pay for your own medical care.

Anybody got an extant link to a plain text, searchable page with the entire 1300+ pages of either HR3600 or S.1767? The full text of the official bills was never submitted to the Congressional Research Center, the only links I can find are either summaries or broken up into a hundred little sections, and discussion of the HSA 1993 is swamped by discussions of later efforts. I wouldn't mind going over this and pointing out all the little threats to basic freedom, just not by searching a hundred sections of legalese.
 
Last edited: