Privatized or Universal Healthcare?

[Ȃ̷̛́͌̚͝r̵c̸̛̒͐̅̇]

When we think about Universal Healthcare some of us may think it's free when it's truly not as it comes through more taxes in order of achieving everyone that would be insured for health, but there may be need to be a dramatic increase of taxes for better quality healthcare like Denmark as it's more than 40%.

Privatized Healthcare on the other hand, Is a optional choice for people to choose as the quality may be better without government involvement as it can be less taxes and not paying for someone else's insurance. Also it may come quicker when in emergency rooms than a single payer healthcare system that takes a long time in other developed countries.

Which would you prefer? Quality or a Right?

[RRW359]

Αναρτήθηκε αρχικά από Ulfrinn:

Αναρτήθηκε αρχικά από RRW359:

Do you have a source for US Cancer survival rates? Or a source that says what the eligibility requirements are to erase debt that presumably would be shown to everyone before they get evicted and/or foreclosed on? Also is the debt is just forgiven in which case without a publicly-funded source of insurance it just unpredictably increases everyone's medical bills whenever someone can't pay for theirs?

The Medicaid eligibility limit is different per state based on the income and costs of living for that state so you would have to look up a specific state's department of social services to see what their eligibility requirements are. For most states it'll be around $1,500-$2,000 a month, people under that, or people over it, with expenses that would put them under that once deducted would receive it for free. And these programs have existed since the 1960s.

If the limit is $1,600 a month, and you earn $2,000 a month, but you have a pre-existing condition that costs you $400 a month, then that drops you down to $1,600, makes you eligible, and pays for the medications or treatments, retroactively too in most cases.

So it varies and not everyone is eligible or knows they ate. If you are for that then you are for universal healthcare, if you are against a specific method of implementing it then say what's wrong with that but why would it cost any more taxpayer money if nobody is financially harmed majorly by emergency medical bills and if people are why shouldn't they be covered?

[Ulfrinn]

Αναρτήθηκε αρχικά από hypercybermegatron:

Αναρτήθηκε αρχικά από Ulfrinn:

You discredited yourself when you cited a WashingtonPost headline to an article you didn't even read.

And I'm not the one having a hard time coming to terms with reality. It seems like the only people who take issue with the US system are people who have never actually used it. Just like it seems like the US has more experts who have never been within our borders than any other country. Tell me, how long has the US had tax-funded healthcare for the poor? Do you know when that was established?

Sorry that it seems like you didn't read Wapo article. It appears quite neutral but does challenge the assertion that USA can only be a destination for refugees and not a source.

"Lawyers like Raha Jorjani, also a professor at the University of California at Davis School of Law, had argued that black Americans had a reasonable argument for refugee status abroad because of their mistreatment at the hands of the United States."

US is becoming less desirable to live, and the emigration stats prove that.

As for US taxpayer funded healthcare, are you referring to Medicare? LBJ introduced it 1965. Yes, extending Medicare to all citizens would be the most efficient and affective means of providing healthcare in America.

You have no idea what Medicare actually is, or what it's for, do you? And no, I was speaking of Medicaid, which I'd be surprised if you even knew existed.

[Ulfrinn]

Αναρτήθηκε αρχικά από RRW359:

Αναρτήθηκε αρχικά από Ulfrinn:

The Medicaid eligibility limit is different per state based on the income and costs of living for that state so you would have to look up a specific state's department of social services to see what their eligibility requirements are. For most states it'll be around $1,500-$2,000 a month, people under that, or people over it, with expenses that would put them under that once deducted would receive it for free. And these programs have existed since the 1960s.

If the limit is $1,600 a month, and you earn $2,000 a month, but you have a pre-existing condition that costs you $400 a month, then that drops you down to $1,600, makes you eligible, and pays for the medications or treatments, retroactively too in most cases.

So it varies and not everyone is eligible or knows they ate. If you are for that then you are for universal healthcare, if you are against a specific method of implementing it then say what's wrong with that but why would it cost any more taxpayer money if nobody is financially harmed majorly by emergency medical bills and if people are why shouldn't they be covered?

People who made a decent enough amount of money without a lot of pre-existing costs or conditioners... you know, people who can afford to pay for private plans or get it through their employers don't get it for free. Nor should they.

The funding is reserved for those who cannot afford it.

This is not universal healthcare.

[Enterprofilenamehere]

Αναρτήθηκε αρχικά από ZZZZZ:

Αναρτήθηκε αρχικά από Enterprofilenamehere:

You need to become a Canadian resident first but yes.

no u can get treatment there and just walk out of the country and wait 20years till the bill is expired

My tax dollars paid for that bill dammit!

[Ulfrinn]

Αναρτήθηκε αρχικά από Enterprofilenamehere:

Αναρτήθηκε αρχικά από ZZZZZ:

no u can get treatment there and just walk out of the country and wait 20years till the bill is expired

My tax dollars paid for that bill dammit!

That's true for pretty much any country. None that I am aware of actually turns anyone away from a hospital. They just receive a bill, and if they leave the country and never pay it there's not a whole hell of a lot they can do about it.

[RRW359]

Αναρτήθηκε αρχικά από Ulfrinn:

Αναρτήθηκε αρχικά από RRW359:

So it varies and not everyone is eligible or knows they ate. If you are for that then you are for universal healthcare, if you are against a specific method of implementing it then say what's wrong with that but why would it cost any more taxpayer money if nobody is financially harmed majorly by emergency medical bills and if people are why shouldn't they be covered?

People who made a decent enough amount of money without a lot of pre-existing costs or conditioners... you know, people who can afford to pay for private plans or get it through their employers don't get it for free. Nor should they.

The funding is reserved for those who cannot afford it.

This is not universal healthcare.

As opponents of universal healthcare always say it isn't free, everyone will have an increase in taxes. The difference is that people who can better afford to pay more will pay more as opposed to the same plans being offered to anyone regardless of their income. If a higher percent of your finances are used for essentials then the more difficult it is to pay the same percent or worse fixed amount. All forms of universal healthcare have conditions they will /won't cover so if it just covers emergency care and prevents people from losing many of their possessions for unpredictable conditions that would still be unacceptable to you?

[Ulfrinn]

Αναρτήθηκε αρχικά από RRW359:

Αναρτήθηκε αρχικά από Ulfrinn:

People who made a decent enough amount of money without a lot of pre-existing costs or conditioners... you know, people who can afford to pay for private plans or get it through their employers don't get it for free. Nor should they.

The funding is reserved for those who cannot afford it.

This is not universal healthcare.

As opponents of universal healthcare always say it isn't free, everyone will have an increase in taxes. The difference is that people who can better afford to pay more will pay more as opposed to the same plans being offered to anyone regardless of their income. If a higher percent of your finances are used for essentials then the more difficult it is to pay the same percent or worse fixed amount. All forms of universal healthcare have conditions they will /won't cover so if it just covers emergency care and prevents people from losing many of their possessions for unpredictable conditions that would still be unacceptable to you?

If you actually believed hospitals turned people away, or people were dying without healthcare, or going bankrupt with bills, you were misled. Now you use some logic. Why would the people spreading that disinformation do so? It's simple, they're trying to buy votes by marketing an idea.

And we've already seen how government manages these programs. We have Medicare for elderly people, we have VA for military veterans and they've been so poorly mismanaged that in some cases the courts had to get involved. Nobody who actually lives here would be foolish enough to let the same people control all the healthcare because of some empty promises made by some empty suits.

It's astonishing how much more non Americans trust the US government than actual Americans do.

[RRW359]

Αναρτήθηκε αρχικά από Ulfrinn:

Αναρτήθηκε αρχικά από RRW359:

As opponents of universal healthcare always say it isn't free, everyone will have an increase in taxes. The difference is that people who can better afford to pay more will pay more as opposed to the same plans being offered to anyone regardless of their income. If a higher percent of your finances are used for essentials then the more difficult it is to pay the same percent or worse fixed amount. All forms of universal healthcare have conditions they will /won't cover so if it just covers emergency care and prevents people from losing many of their possessions for unpredictable conditions that would still be unacceptable to you?

If you actually believed hospitals turned people away, or people were dying without healthcare, or going bankrupt with bills, you were misled. Now you use some logic. Why would the people spreading that disinformation do so? It's simple, they're trying to buy votes by marketing an idea.

And we've already seen how government manages these programs. We have Medicare for elderly people, we have VA for military veterans and they've been so poorly mismanaged that in some cases the courts had to get involved. Nobody who actually lives here would be foolish enough to let the same people control all the healthcare because of some empty promises made by some empty suits.

It's astonishing how much more non Americans trust the US government than actual Americans do.

Well I live in America and have experienced people struggling with medical bills but regardless you keep moving the goalposts for what counts as universal healthcare so I have to ask what exactally do you think people are proposing we cover when we talk about it?

[WhiteKnight77]

Αναρτήθηκε αρχικά από Ulfrinn:

Αναρτήθηκε αρχικά από RRW359:

As opponents of universal healthcare always say it isn't free, everyone will have an increase in taxes. The difference is that people who can better afford to pay more will pay more as opposed to the same plans being offered to anyone regardless of their income. If a higher percent of your finances are used for essentials then the more difficult it is to pay the same percent or worse fixed amount. All forms of universal healthcare have conditions they will /won't cover so if it just covers emergency care and prevents people from losing many of their possessions for unpredictable conditions that would still be unacceptable to you?

And we've already seen how government manages these programs. We have Medicare for elderly people, we have VA for military veterans and they've been so poorly mismanaged that in some cases the courts had to get involved. Nobody who actually lives here would be foolish enough to let the same people control all the healthcare because of some empty promises made by some empty suits.

I don't know how people have missed the poor care that the VA offers Vets. When you have investigations on why people are put on waiting lists before they can be seen and die henceforth, of course questions should be asked and those in charge should be fired, and charged with complicity in the deaths of said veterans.

[Ulfrinn]

Αναρτήθηκε αρχικά από RRW359:

Αναρτήθηκε αρχικά από Ulfrinn:

If you actually believed hospitals turned people away, or people were dying without healthcare, or going bankrupt with bills, you were misled. Now you use some logic. Why would the people spreading that disinformation do so? It's simple, they're trying to buy votes by marketing an idea.

And we've already seen how government manages these programs. We have Medicare for elderly people, we have VA for military veterans and they've been so poorly mismanaged that in some cases the courts had to get involved. Nobody who actually lives here would be foolish enough to let the same people control all the healthcare because of some empty promises made by some empty suits.

It's astonishing how much more non Americans trust the US government than actual Americans do.

Well I live in America and have experienced people struggling with medical bills but regardless you keep moving the goalposts for what counts as universal healthcare so I have to ask what exactally do you think people are proposing we cover when we talk about it?

I never moved a single goal post about what universal healthcare is. I explained what how the US operates, and how the US operates is not "universal" because only people under the poverty limit qualify for the tax payer funded aspect of it. If it was universal, everyone would get it. And that isn't the case.

Should someone who can afford to pay for their own health insurance, not have to pay for their own health insurance?

[Ulfrinn]

Αναρτήθηκε αρχικά από WhiteKnight77:

Αναρτήθηκε αρχικά από Ulfrinn:

And we've already seen how government manages these programs. We have Medicare for elderly people, we have VA for military veterans and they've been so poorly mismanaged that in some cases the courts had to get involved. Nobody who actually lives here would be foolish enough to let the same people control all the healthcare because of some empty promises made by some empty suits.

I don't know how people have missed the poor care that the VA offers Vets. When you have investigations on why people are put on waiting lists before they can be seen and die henceforth, of course questions should be asked and those in charge should be fired, and charged with complicity in the deaths of said veterans.

Yeah, we've actually seen government healthcare programs get people killed with excessively long wait times. Not too dissimilar from Canada's system that their Supreme Court had to intervene in as well.

[Bamford]

Such generous government programs cannot work based on preferences of those who favor them. Like a farmer with a soft heart for feeding rats.

[Dracoco OwO]

Αναρτήθηκε αρχικά από RRW359:

Αναρτήθηκε αρχικά από GoreTiger:

Nobody lets you die, Idk where this misconception comes from. Hospitals cannot turn you away when your life is in danger.

If you can't get lifesaving medicine beyond the basic stabilization that is required then you die. Also if you end up homeless with all the cons that come with it since you lost your house or couldn't afford rent due to medical debt you either didn't consent to or weren't in a fit state of mind to consent to your life expectancy drops segnificantly.

Let's not forget the horribly inflated price of insulin in the states, so many obese peoples there.

[secuda]

Αναρτήθηκε αρχικά από Ulfrinn:

Αναρτήθηκε αρχικά από Xero_Daxter:

Alrighty. So how are we gonna make healthcare available for everyone without cutting the quality of the healthcare? And what about the staff and doctors who are overworked and underpaid; how are they being compensated? And how would that affect taxes?

In the end money has to come from somewhere.

Dude, you're talking to people who actually think their healthcare is free just because the money for it is taken out of their paycheck without direct knowledge of it.

Ironic how you putt it like that and then complain people dont pay to pay more money for their hospitall visit, as if we where stuid no thats how taxes work let the low/mid income be able to afford hospitall visit.

[RRW359]

Αναρτήθηκε αρχικά από Ulfrinn:

Αναρτήθηκε αρχικά από RRW359:

Well I live in America and have experienced people struggling with medical bills but regardless you keep moving the goalposts for what counts as universal healthcare so I have to ask what exactally do you think people are proposing we cover when we talk about it?

I never moved a single goal post about what universal healthcare is. I explained what how the US operates, and how the US operates is not "universal" because only people under the poverty limit qualify for the tax payer funded aspect of it. If it was universal, everyone would get it. And that isn't the case.

Should someone who can afford to pay for their own health insurance, not have to pay for their own health insurance?

Is it universal in that nobody ever has to go through major life changes from emergency medical bills or is it not universal in that it only applies to certain people and if you are in the middle ground where you don't qualify for low-income relief you are risking everything just from getting sick?