Next step: Eliminate employer insurance and "transition" to single payer

[dario73]

Obama - (SEIU Healthcare Forum) - 3/24/07
"But I don't think we're going to be able to eliminate employer coverage immediately. There's going to be potentially some transition process. I can envision a decade out or 15 years out or 20 years out.."

President Barack Obama made it no secret he was a proponent of a single payer health care system in America when he first came on to the national scene. However, he explained to his supporters over the years that a "potential transition" would be necessary to break away from the current system.
Interestingly, as the implementation of the Obamacare exchanges face problems and millions begin to lose coverage from their private insurers, something President Obama promised would not happen, Democrats and their liberal allies are now beginning to suggest a single payer system as a solution to the rickety exchanges.

Rep. John Larson (D - CT) told Breitbart News last Wednesday that under a single payer system Americans would not be losing their private health care coverage, claiming, "You would be covered automatically. But that’s not the law. The law is that it’s a free enterprise system and they have the right not to enter into the exchange or not to provide for you in the exchange. That is their right."

http://www.breitbart.com/InstaBlog/2013/10/29/Flashback-Obama-s-Campaign-to-Transition-to-Single-Payer-Health-Care-VIDEO

[RRKore]

Schweet!  Bring on the next step, I say!

[Shockwave]

I would take single payer over what we have mow anyday.

obamacare is far worse.

im usually pretty libertarian or conservative but imho if were going to have national healthcare (inevitable at this point), get the fucking insurance companies out of there and go single payer.

all weve done at this point is created a system where a seleft few insurance companies dominate in a situation where theu have no business being.

[dario73]

Sweeeeeeet.

Lets trust an entity that has managed Social Security, the post office and medicaid into near bankruptcy.

Sweeeeeeeeet!

Bring on 6 month waiting period for MRI and operations. That's if you don't die first.

Sweeeeeet!

Bring on the rationing and sub-par medical care, research and advancement.

[Roger Bacon]

Was this the plan all along? Hit us with something so fucked up that we would accept something a little less fucked up?

[Pray_4_War]

Was this the plan all along? Hit us with something so fucked up that we would accept something a little less fucked up?

Of course.  That's how they do business. 

[RRKore]

Sweeeeeeet.

Lets trust an entity that has managed Social Security, the post office and medicaid into near bankruptcy.

Sweeeeeeeeet!

Bring on 6 month waiting period for MRI and operations. That's if you don't die first.

Sweeeeeet!

Bring on the rationing and sub-par medical care, research and advancement.

Is this the case in other 1st world countries that have single-payer?  Oh, their healthcare sucks?  Really?  Then how come their adult and infant mortality rates in so many of them beat ours?  What are they doing that we can't?  I don't buy the argument that our government can't do single-payer as well as those damn furriners. 

 

[RRKore]

Was this the plan all along? Hit us with something so fucked up that we would accept something a little less fucked up?

Well, yeah.  Of course.

Needs to said, though, that based on potential cost savings alone, single-payer is a lot less fucked up than ACA.  And less fucked up than the pre-ACA system. 

[tonymctones]

Was this the plan all along? Hit us with something so fucked up that we would accept something a little less fucked up?

i have thought this is a possibility all along

[RRKore]

i have thought this is a possibility all along

And would you be for or against it?

[Roger Bacon]

Sweeeeeeet.

Lets trust an entity that has managed Social Security, the post office and medicaid into near bankruptcy.

Sweeeeeeeeet!

Bring on 6 month waiting period for MRI and operations. That's if you don't die first.

Sweeeeeet!

Bring on the rationing and sub-par medical care, research and advancement.

It's complete insanity, mind boggling

[Roger Bacon]

Is this the case in other 1st world countries that have single-payer?  Oh, their healthcare sucks?  Really?  Then how come their adult and infant mortality rates in so many of them beat ours?  What are they doing that we can't?  I don't buy the argument that our government can't do single-payer as well as those damn furriners. 

 

Yes, government is inherently inept.

This isn't about doing something more economical for the common man, with politicians it never is.  It's about consolidating power. 

I'll just arrange for my own healthcare, and cut out the middle man (government).

[RRKore]

I'll just arrange for my own healthcare, and cut out the middle man (government).

That doesn't make you very special here on getbig.  Aren't most of us taking care own healthcare?  Now excuse me while I go take care of my drug co-pay via Western Union...lol

[Fury]

Is this the case in other 1st world countries that have single-payer?  Oh, their healthcare sucks?  Really?  Then how come their adult and infant mortality rates in so many of them beat ours?  What are they doing that we can't?  I don't buy the argument that our government can't do single-payer as well as those damn furriners. 

 

That has more to do with lifestyle and dietary habits than it does healthcare. Let's also not forget a large number of these countries are completely bankrupt.

And I enjoy how clowns like you ignore the fact that those countries are able to do that with the healthcare due to the fact that the USA subsidizes them via our drug and medical research that lets them avoid having to do any of their own.

[Tedim]

Sweeeeeeet.

Lets trust an entity that has managed Social Security, the post office and medicaid into near bankruptcy.

Sweeeeeeeeet!

Bring on 6 month waiting period for MRI and operations. That's if you don't die first.

Sweeeeeet!

Bring on the rationing and sub-par medical care, research and advancement.

That's only for the poor and middle class....private hospitals will still provide care to the affluent, so let the others eat cake.

[RRKore]

That has more to do with lifestyle and dietary habits than it does healthcare. Let's also not forget a large number of these countries are completely bankrupt.

And I enjoy how clowns like you ignore the fact that those countries are able to do that with the healthcare due to the fact that the USA subsidizes them via our drug and medical research that lets them avoid having to do any of their own.

You ENJOY it?  Is this related to your GB moniker, oh furious one?

You know, the more I think about each part of your reply, the stupider it seems.

It's reasonable to say that lifestyle and dietary factors heavily influence adult mortality.  (These factors, however, are oversold as the reason for American's poorer health outcomes relative to those in other countries  -- We are fatter, sure, but we also smoke and drink less, too.)  Are you really saying, as you seem to be, that lifestyle and dietary habits, as they affect adult mortality rates, would not be affected by being able to see a doctor more often?  Doubtful, I think.  Many people won't listen to a doctor's advice but some will.  And if they never see a doctor...well, you get the point.
 
And I included INFANT MORTALITY rates.  Are you really claiming that healthcare has little effect on that?  You are full of shit because you can't possibly be that dumb.  Just because you dropped out of your mom's diseased vag on the hay-strewn floor of the barn she lived in without the benefit of a doctor's care and you lived to tell the tale does not mean that all would.  Infant mortality rates are directly affected by the presence and quality of healthcare.

Oh, and these other countries are bankrupt?  What are you even saying here?  How would that affect the fact that their per capita spending on healthcare is less (often a lot less) than ours and yet their people are healthier?  Besides, what's the US national debt right now?  And wouldn't their be a postive impact on the deficit & debt if we were able to pay less for healthcare without our health suffering for it? 

Blah, blah, blah research blah, blah.  NO. The reason we pay more is because we WILL pay more.  Until we go to single-payer people of the US will lack the leverage to make health providers (of service, equipment, and drugs) charge less for everything.  This is not the only factor for why we pay more than any other 1st world countries but it's the biggest one.  This and other reasons are discussed in this informative video. 
I hope you learn something.  Fag.

[dario73]

And I included INFANT MORTALITY rates.  Are you really claiming that healthcare has little effect on that?  You are full of shit because you can't possibly be that dumb.  Just because you dropped out of your mom's diseased vag on the hay-strewn floor of the barn she lived in without the benefit of a doctor's care and you lived to tell the tale does not mean that all would.  Infant mortality rates are directly affected by the presence and quality of healthcare.

, blah, blah research blah, blah.  NO. The reason we pay more is because we WILL pay more.  Until we go to single-payer people of the US will lack the leverage to make health providers (of service, equipment, and drugs) charge less for everything.  This is not the only factor for why we pay more than any other 1st world countries but it's the biggest one.  This and other reasons are discussed in this informative video. 
I hope you learn something.  Fag.

You typed all this garbage, yet avoided the premise of Fury's post.

Deflect. Deflect. Deflect.

The governement should not be involved in health insurance, nor health care.

[RRKore]

You typed all this garbage, yet avoided the premise of Fury's post.

Deflect. Deflect. Deflect.

The governement should not be involved in health insurance, nor health care.

Deflect?  What deflection? 

The premise of the OP's post concerned the "nefarious" left's intention to transition from ACA to single-payer, right?  So is it really deflection to educate some motherfuckers about how single payer is a good thing because it's the number one way to lower healthcare costs?  (And, btw, not doing anything to lower healthcare costs is one of the main legit complaints about ACA that I hear from the smarter folks on the right.)  I think it's a good strategy:  If people don't end up going for single payer and we have to stay with ACA, well, it's not so bad because there will be some 14 million people with health insurance who had none before.  Not to mention that all insurance plans will conform to minimum standards.  And if we do get single payer then costs should come down considerably (as was pointed out in the video that you may not have watched) and America will have done something significant about its debt problem..

Oh, but wait.  To say all that is deflection to you, right?  You probably want people on this thread to focus on the allegation that Dems LIED by publically pushing for ACA when they were hoping that ACA would only be a stop-gap measure before moving on to the socialistic single-payer system?  Even though many dems publically stated that they were against ACA because it didn't go far enough (because ACA wasn't single payer).

All because you think that "The governement should not be involved in health insurance, nor health care."?  Well, Mr. pro-insurance industry, how about if you tell us why you think that?  Or, if you prefer, you can go eat a dick.  Your decision.