Why single payer would work despite protest claims

[HumblePie]

I was talking with a co-worker about the health care reform and he had some really good points. Our discussion brought up some interesting things to think about. But instead of going into detail about everything our conversation meandered over, I want to stick with one issue. Single payer.

He believes that we all should pay taxes for a single payer program like Canada. Then let private insurance companies compete if they want to. Many people claim that this would be the death to the health insurance industry and I brought that point up to him. At which point here is a few counter points he brought up.

1) School systems. We all pay taxes for public schools no matter where we live in America. Yet there are still private schools out there. So why would anyone already "paying" for schooling for their children would pay more for private schooling? This is the argument right now being used by opponents of the single payer system. That since people are already paying the government for one thing, they wouldn't use something offered in the private sector.

2) Postal service. We all currently pay for the postal system of USPS. Still, there are private companies like Fedex, UPS, DHL, and many others that are doing well. So why is anyone bothering with using the private companies for their postal needs?


There are many other examples out there like this. Where people all pay for a basic service through taxes, yet there are still private companies competing against the government and still doing well. However, we all have a fall back incase we need it. Single payer would not kill health insurance companies at all.

 

[EagleKeeper]

People will shift to the private sector when the public sector will not deliver what is expected for the costs.

If the government sector of medical care, limits what can be done,who can use it or when it can be used; people will shift to the private. However, with the government acting like a monopoly and having the ability to penalize the competition (raising taxes/issuing regulations); the private sector can not easily compete and will probably fail.

The government is already trying to cripple the insurance companies by adding taxes and regulations.
And they are not even in competition with them yet.

Look at the tax S/W industry.
The government forced/encouraged the companies to make it free for the lower income brackets.
That worked for a couple of years. Then the companies figured out that they could charge for the previous years service for conveniences.


Now the consumer is still having to pay - the government interference has not saved money in the end - just time shifted it.

 

[cubeless]

but wouldn't it just be like medicare today? my mom has medicare, who pays their piece, and then her medi-gap and pension plan coverage to cover the rest...

if we have single payer it is everyone's primary, and if you want you can purchase secondary to cover, speed up, improve, etc...

 

[Slew Foot]

the USPS doesnt get tax money does it?

 

[nonlnear]

the USPS doesnt get tax money does it?

It gets massive implicit subsidies from various places. It benefits from mandatory price floors on its competitors, laws barring private competition in letter distribution, the tax free status of all of its assets, and the implicit federal guarantee of its liabilities which has freed them to underfund their pensions, etc. All this and they still manage to be hemorrhaging money faster than you can believe.

People have to stop thinking of subsidies as always being direct funding. The implicit subsidies that government related agencies receive are often worth much MUCH more than any explicit allotments that show up on the federal books.

 

[HumblePie]

but wouldn't it just be like medicare today? my mom has medicare, who pays their piece, and then her medi-gap and pension plan coverage to cover the rest...

if we have single payer it is everyone's primary, and if you want you can purchase secondary to cover, speed up, improve, etc...

Yep, pretty much.

 

[heyheybooboo]

I gots no problem with it as long as it is 'self-funded' and based upon the Medicare Model.

Subsidies may still apply to the 'self-funded public option' based upon economic status. And most importantly:

I have no problem with a reasonable tax credit for those who choose to maintain private coverage.




--

 

[sandorski]

Adopt the Swiss system. Private Insurance provides Basic Service to everyone at a particular Price point, Government Subsidizes certain Income levels, and where the Private Insurance Industry makes their Profit is through the Sale of Extras. Those Extras would be for things like Private Rooms, Dental(or extra Dental coverage), Home Care, and what not.

That way you don't need to cut out the Insurance Industry and people can Pick/Choose their provider who will Compete not through Price, but through Extras. The downside of Insurers is that they will take a hit to Profits while they transition(likely to occurs no matter what Reform is done) and possibly there will be Consolidations and Failures for awhile, but the system is working quite well in Switzerland.

 

[PokerGuy]

I was talking with a co-worker about the health care reform and he had some really good points. Our discussion brought up some interesting things to think about. But instead of going into detail about everything our conversation meandered over, I want to stick with one issue. Single payer.

He believes that we all should pay taxes for a single payer program like Canada. Then let private insurance companies compete if they want to. Many people claim that this would be the death to the health insurance industry and I brought that point up to him. At which point here is a few counter points he brought up.

1) School systems. We all pay taxes for public schools no matter where we live in America. Yet there are still private schools out there. So why would anyone already "paying" for schooling for their children would pay more for private schooling? This is the argument right now being used by opponents of the single payer system. That since people are already paying the government for one thing, they wouldn't use something offered in the private sector.

2) Postal service. We all currently pay for the postal system of USPS. Still, there are private companies like Fedex, UPS, DHL, and many others that are doing well. So why is anyone bothering with using the private companies for their postal needs?


There are many other examples out there like this. Where people all pay for a basic service through taxes, yet there are still private companies competing against the government and still doing well. However, we all have a fall back incase we need it. Single payer would not kill health insurance companies at all.

Those examples are actually good arguments AGAINST single payer, not for it. Look at the disaster of public schools in America. Many parents would love to get vouchers so they could afford to send their kids to good schools, but the teachers unions and other idiots are entrenched and against it. So everyone ends up paying a ton towards public schools, and only those with money can afford to give their kids a better education. The public school system in most inner cities is what you can expect our health care system to look like under Obamacare.

The USPS is not a good example because 1) it's not run using taxpayer money, and 2) you only have to pay if you choose to use it. With Obamacare, you have no choice, you WILL get into the crappy government health care system.... unless you are a member of congress, they defeated an amendment that would make the members of congress use the same garbage system they want to foist on everyone else.

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

Adopt the Swiss system. Private Insurance provides Basic Service to everyone at a particular Price point, Government Subsidizes certain Income levels, and where the Private Insurance Industry makes their Profit is through the Sale of Extras. Those Extras would be for things like Private Rooms, Dental(or extra Dental coverage), Home Care, and what not.

That way you don't need to cut out the Insurance Industry and people can Pick/Choose their provider who will Compete not through Price, but through Extras. The downside of Insurers is that they will take a hit to Profits while they transition(likely to occurs no matter what Reform is done) and possibly there will be Consolidations and Failures for awhile, but the system is working quite well in Switzerland.

That's fine, but Congress can't pass anything good. In Switzerland they are concerned about health care, and here as the Dems and Reps have demonstrated, it's all about politics.

It's not that it can't be done right, but party is above all here. Let me know when that changes.

In theory, this isn't a bad option, but some provision will have to be made when people suddenly find themselves without coverage while things settle out.

Above all, government needs to stay out of the provider/patient relationship. Dr. Senator hasn't a clue, no surprise.

 

[Perknose]

Adopt the Swiss system. Private Insurance provides Basic Service to everyone at a particular Price point, Government Subsidizes certain Income levels, and where the Private Insurance Industry makes their Profit is through the Sale of Extras. Those Extras would be for things like Private Rooms, Dental(or extra Dental coverage), Home Care, and what not.

That way you don't need to cut out the Insurance Industry and people can Pick/Choose their provider who will Compete not through Price, but through Extras. The downside of Insurers is that they will take a hit to Profits while they transition(likely to occurs no matter what Reform is done) and possibly there will be Consolidations and Failures for awhile, but the system is working quite well in Switzerland.

<spidey voice> Communism! Socialism! Loss of freedom! Obama is Hitler! </spidey voice>

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

<spidey voice> Communism! Socialism! Loss of freedom! Obama is Hitler! </spidey voice>

I had to tell a patient recently (in as kind a way as I could) that because Medicaid changed the numbers on his card before mailing them that he could not get his medication.

This man is now dead. Oh, he may still be walking I don't know, but he's dead. Nothing can save him from the startling aggressive case of AIDS he suffers from other than continued treatment on a timely basis. Now it's too late.

I can say that telling a patient that they are going to die because of a regulatory error didn't sit well with me. He's not the only one affected.

In this case he suffered from a loss of life due to government control and irresponsibility.

That's why I insisted on insurance reform being well thought out in advance.

The government has the ultimate say in whether you live or die based on how well they write words. No other entity has that power, and unfortunately they often do not seem to care that what they do has consequences outside of their intended effort.

Yes, a Swiss type program might be good, but we have a greedy corrupt political system rivaled by few in the First World.

When politicians care about the citizens more than their party, I'll be less apprehensive.

I don't want to hand out another death sentence.

 

[LTC8K6]

The USPS would not exist if it weren't heavily subsidized and didn't have a monopoly on first class letters, so I don't think it's a good idea to use it in arguments about competition or government run entities.

 

[jstern01]

I had to tell a patient recently (in as kind a way as I could) that because Medicaid changed the numbers on his card before mailing them that he could not get his medication.

This man is now dead. Oh, he may still be walking I don't know, but he's dead. Nothing can save him from the startling aggressive case of AIDS he suffers from other than continued treatment on a timely basis. Now it's too late.

I can say that telling a patient that they are going to die because of a regulatory error didn't sit well with me. He's not the only one affected.

In this case he suffered from a loss of life due to government control and irresponsibility.

That's why I insisted on insurance reform being well thought out in advance.

The government has the ultimate say in whether you live or die based on how well they write words. No other entity has that power, and unfortunately they often do not seem to care that what they do has consequences outside of their intended effort.

Yes, a Swiss type program might be good, but we have a greedy corrupt political system rivaled by few in the First World.

When politicians care about the citizens more than their party, I'll be less apprehensive.

I don't want to hand out another death sentence.

Well put. :thumbsup:

 

[tk149]

I had to tell a patient recently (in as kind a way as I could) that because Medicaid changed the numbers on his card before mailing them that he could not get his medication.

This man is now dead. Oh, he may still be walking I don't know, but he's dead. Nothing can save him from the startling aggressive case of AIDS he suffers from other than continued treatment on a timely basis. Now it's too late.

I can say that telling a patient that they are going to die because of a regulatory error didn't sit well with me. He's not the only one affected.

In this case he suffered from a loss of life due to government control and irresponsibility.

That's why I insisted on insurance reform being well thought out in advance.

The government has the ultimate say in whether you live or die based on how well they write words. No other entity has that power, and unfortunately they often do not seem to care that what they do has consequences outside of their intended effort.

Yes, a Swiss type program might be good, but we have a greedy corrupt political system rivaled by few in the First World.

When politicians care about the citizens more than their party, I'll be less apprehensive.

I don't want to hand out another death sentence.

That's horrible. I'm sorry.

My government story isn't nearly as bad as yours, and I am, by law, not allowed to go into much detail, but suffice it to say that because of the way some paper-pusher worded the law, we were not allowed to file our documentation BEFORE 60 days, and we were not allowed to file our documentation AFTER 60 days. We had to file EXACTLY on the 60th day. Thank god the 60th day wasn't on a weekend.

Yeah, these are the same guys screwing with a fifth of our economy and our health care.

 

[Anarchist420]

Single-payer would not work, taxes would go even further through the roof, and it would be a monopoly. This country is too big and spends too much money on other BS for single payer to be an option.

 

[HumblePie]

Hayabusa... and private has worked so well?

I've had a friend going in for an operation on a life threatening brain tumor. Everything was scheduled weeks in advanced and prior approved. The day of, the insurance calls him and the hospital and drops coverage. Result? He's now dead. He didn't last long enough to fight it, and get the money to get the work done. Also, this isn't something you show up in an ER for and get work done on you.

Whenever you deal with anything on this scale, there will always be problems and mistakes. However, the difference is of intent, of scale, of how many mistakes, and other factors. As of right now, insurance companies could care less about the people they insure for the most part. Oh I am sure many people working for those companies do care, but the ones doing the figures don't. They just see green and numbers.

Yah with some government run things, many of the higher ups only see numbers as well. The difference is they aren't seeing green as well in regards to their mission.

 

[Fern]

-snip-

1) School systems. We all pay taxes for public schools no matter where we live in America. Yet there are still private schools out there. So why would anyone already "paying" for schooling for their children would pay more for private schooling? This is the argument right now being used by opponents of the single payer system. That since people are already paying the government for one thing, they wouldn't use something offered in the private sector.

Pretty lame (so is the USPS example).

Look at the stock market and add up the value of all private school company stock, that would be about zero.

The stock market value of big HI insurers was about $120 billion before the recession (now about $60B). How much more in the thousands of smaller companies is anybody's guess. How many isurance agencies selling HI policies are your town?

No one pushing single payer will answer the question of what happens when the gov wipes out that wealth, much of which is held in pension plans and 401(k)'s.

The answer is that we'd have to pay for it, and it would be hellishly expensive.

Fern

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

Hayabusa... and private has worked so well?

I've had a friend going in for an operation on a life threatening brain tumor. Everything was scheduled weeks in advanced and prior approved. The day of, the insurance calls him and the hospital and drops coverage. Result? He's now dead. He didn't last long enough to fight it, and get the money to get the work done. Also, this isn't something you show up in an ER for and get work done on you.

Whenever you deal with anything on this scale, there will always be problems and mistakes. However, the difference is of intent, of scale, of how many mistakes, and other factors. As of right now, insurance companies could care less about the people they insure for the most part. Oh I am sure many people working for those companies do care, but the ones doing the figures don't. They just see green and numbers.

Yah with some government run things, many of the higher ups only see numbers as well. The difference is they aren't seeing green as well in regards to their mission.

This has affected the entire state of NY. Want to talk about scale?
FWIW I think insurance companies ought to be restricted as to when they can drop someone. Did they just drop him, or did him employer do something? What, particularly?

In the case I cited, the patient DID have coverage. The snag was that medicaid changed the sequence numbers on cards before they were mailed out.

No problem you might think. You just call and get the new number.

Nope. Neither the patient nor the provider can get that information. They have to wait 4 to 6 weeks for the new card. I explained the situation (and again FWIW I've NEVER had this happen with private insurance.) and the consequences.

The response? "It's not legal, and if you assist the patient in circumventing this by some means you will have committed a crime and will be prosecuted if caught".

The difference between you and I is that I know there are problems and health care reform needs to happen. That does not mean that UHC will fix a thing. What counts is the thoughtfulness put in to any legislation in advance, not saying "we'll fix it later".

So I probably could have eventually guessed the number. That made me either complicit in killing him or committing a felony.

That's not a hypothetical. That's reality.

 

[Zebo]

Pretty lame (so is the USPS example).

Look at the stock market and add up the value of all private school company stock, that would be about zero.

The stock market value of big HI insurers was about $120 billion before the recession (now about $60B). How much more in the thousands of smaller companies is anybody's guess. How many isurance agencies selling HI policies are your town?

No one pushing single payer will answer the question of what happens when the gov wipes out that wealth, much of which is held in pension plans and 401(k)'s.

The answer is that we'd have to pay for it, and it would be hellishly expensive.

Fern

Arnt you just wiping out main streets wealth for wall streets in current regime? I have better things to do with the almost $1000 a month I send to CELTIC. You do understand insurance is a parasitic industry right? Produces nothing. I'd rather have my parasites making GS-9 to GS-13 salaries than 1-50M a year.

PS this is one reason why EU and Japan can insure all for half or less than half per capita.

 

[Genx87]

I was talking with a co-worker about the health care reform and he had some really good points. Our discussion brought up some interesting things to think about. But instead of going into detail about everything our conversation meandered over, I want to stick with one issue. Single payer.

He believes that we all should pay taxes for a single payer program like Canada. Then let private insurance companies compete if they want to. Many people claim that this would be the death to the health insurance industry and I brought that point up to him. At which point here is a few counter points he brought up.

1) School systems. We all pay taxes for public schools no matter where we live in America. Yet there are still private schools out there. So why would anyone already "paying" for schooling for their children would pay more for private schooling? This is the argument right now being used by opponents of the single payer system. That since people are already paying the government for one thing, they wouldn't use something offered in the private sector.

2) Postal service. We all currently pay for the postal system of USPS. Still, there are private companies like Fedex, UPS, DHL, and many others that are doing well. So why is anyone bothering with using the private companies for their postal needs?


There are many other examples out there like this. Where people all pay for a basic service through taxes, yet there are still private companies competing against the government and still doing well. However, we all have a fall back incase we need it. Single payer would not kill health insurance companies at all.

1. School system there is a tangible and short term benefit for their children. It also costs a lot of money most of the time. And you will find upper middle class dominates in that landscape. That said the cost of education has risen far pass inflation for decades.

2. USPS has a govt mandated no compete clause for 1st class mail. UPS and Fedex are not allowed to compete in that market. Apples and Oranges. Also USPS while govt sponsered is not tax payer funded.

 

[Fern]

Arnt you just wiping out main streets wealth for wall streets in current regime?

I don't understand the reference to Wall Street.

I do not think of insurance as WS type business, I think of banking, hedge funds, arbitraging, selling stock and other financial products.

I have better things to do with the almost $1000 a month I send to CELTIC. You do understand insurance is a parasitic industry right? Produces nothing. I'd rather have my parasites making GS-9 to GS-13 salaries than 1-50M a year.

PS this is one reason why EU and Japan can insure all for half or less than half per capita.

Well, insurance compamies don't produce a tangible product (not that many business do in the USA today) but insurance is recognized as a valuable product in many of it's forms. Insurance on shipping, property (building) insurance etc.

I think the Obama Admin with the help of the MSM has been running a relentless campaign against HI companies. I don't think they're as bad as made out.

You do realize that Medicare has higher admin cots when viewed form the per even, per person basis? Medicare only looks better because it's handling elderly with very expensive procedures. Spreading out the admin cost for a $100K procedure vs one for $500 is what favors medicare - I.e., it's biased way to prevent the info.

Medicare also has a higher claim rejection rate. yet private HI companies are demonized.

BTW: Their CEO's, while making a lot money, aren't at the top of the scale. That gets exaggerated too.

Our real problem is the underlying costs of HC. We lack standards that other countries have, and our tort system (which they don't have) combines to create a pot-load of redundand and otherwise unnecessary procedures.

We also need to stop subsidizing those countries drug costs. I see no reason we should pay 100% and they get discounts.

Fern

 

[Patranus]

1) School systems.

Schools are city/county/state. NOT the federal government.

2) Postal service.

I am pretty sure that is one of those (few) government agencies explicitly authorized by the Constitution.

Any more examples?

 

[nonlnear]

Schools are city/county/state. NOT the federal government.

That's debatable. The local school boards are more and more becoming effectively federal franchisees. Blow up the Department of Education (figuratively speaking!) and schools would clearly be strictly a state/local affair.

 

[BoberFett]

<spidey voice> Communism! Socialism! Loss of freedom! Obama is Hitler! </spidey voice>

And posts like this are SO much more rational and conducive to conversation than spidey's.

You're just as much a part of the problem, hack.