Clinton unveils mandatory health care insurance plan

[Decker]

have you seen the list of politicians who are personally bankrupt, have criminal records, lost their licenses, etc?  sorry, Deck, i'm not buying it.  where there is money, there is an insatiable drive to possess it, thus we'll always have corruption.  i say we minimize it to individuals rather than to entrust it to the gov't. 

Government is a vessel...an edifice.  It has no ego.  It is not corrupt.  The people that occupy the offices of government can be corrupt or become corrupted.  There are systems for checking the exercise of power.  That's how we learn of the cases to which you refer.


I'm saying that we cannot trust our health care to private, profit driven, interests.  The general cycle for this sort of market driven provision of services is this:

1.  private competition drives down the price of service and raises the level of quality.

2.  Private companies start to win out over other private companies

3.  Competition is reduced.

4.  In an effort to cut prices and improve the bottom line, the Larger companies slash quality

5.  In an effort to improve the bottom line, the larger companies overtake the smaller competitors until only a few giant organizations exist

6.  These giant organizations start to raise prices while the quality stays in the crapper and the bottom line stays large. 

7.  These giant organizations then endear themselves to the lawmakers so that things stay the same:  corrupt.

Cable TV, Telephone services or Microsoft or Intel.....


Let me know if I got that list 1-7 wrong.

[Colossus_500]

Government is a vessel...an edifice.  It has no ego.  It is not corrupt.  The people that occupy the offices of government can be corrupt or become corrupted.  There are systems for checking the exercise of power.  That's how we learn of the cases to which you refer.


I'm saying that we cannot trust our health care to private, profit driven, interests.  The general cycle for this sort of market driven provision of services is this:

1.  private competition drives down the price of service and raises the level of quality.

2.  Private companies start to win out over other private companies

3.  Competition is reduced.

4.  In an effort to cut prices and improve the bottom line, the Larger companies slash quality

5.  In an effort to improve the bottom line, the larger companies overtake the smaller competitors until only a few giant organizations exist

6.  These giant organizations start to raise prices while the quality stays in the crapper and the bottom line stays large. 

7.  These giant organizations then endear themselves to the lawmakers so that things stay the same:  corrupt.

Cable TV, Telephone services or Microsoft or Intel.....


Let me know if I got that list 1-7 wrong.

so then you just remove the lobbyists and rename them to something else, because you're STILL going to have the SAME players involved in putting money in the lawmaker's pockets.  universal healthcare isn't going to change what's happening now. 

Let me know where I'm wrong, bro. 

[Decker]

so then you just remove the lobbyists and rename them to something else, because you're STILL going to have the SAME players involved in putting money in the lawmaker's pockets.  universal healthcare isn't going to change what's happening now. 

Let me know where I'm wrong, bro. 

See there are non-partisan watchdog groups like the GAO which account for the efficacy and dollars spent of governmental programs.  If they don't get a bang for the buck, then something is done.

Where are the checks and balances for privatized healthcare?

[Colossus_500]

See there are non-partisan watchdog groups like the GAO which account for the efficacy and dollars spent of governmental programs.  If they don't get a bang for the buck, then something is done.

Where are the checks and balances for privatized healthcare?

So you're saying these same non-partisan watchdog groups can't do the same for privatized health care?  C'mon, Deck!  We live in an age where we're all about "bustin' chops" out in the open when public figures mess up.  I want you tell me how a government-run (by the people we elect who are or are prone to become corrupt) health care system is the answer. 

[Decker]

So you're saying these same non-partisan watchdog groups can't do the same for privatized health care?  C'mon, Deck!  We live in an age where we're all about "bustin' chops" out in the open when public figures mess up.  I want you tell me how a government-run (by the people we elect who are or are prone to become corrupt) health care system is the answer. 

It's not that they can't do it, it's that they have no authority to do it.

Here is how the gov-run health care system will be better than a privatized type:

ADMINISTRATIVE COSTS

The bureaucracy that we ridicule the federal government for is really pretty good at administrative efforts.

Social Security is the single largest domestic program we have and the administrative cost of the entire enterprise is less than 1%  (.7%) of total expenditures.

Private Insurance companies run between 11 and 15% for those same costs.  Why?  Profit motive, advertising, corporate jets, corporate pay, sponsorship of PGA tournaments, and more.

[Colossus_500]

It's not that they can't do it, it's that they have no authority to do it.

Here is how the gov-run health care system will be better than a privatized type:

ADMINISTRATIVE COSTS

The bureaucracy that we ridicule the federal government for is really pretty good at administrative efforts.

Social Security is the single largest domestic program we have and the administrative cost of the entire enterprise is less than 1%  (.7%) of total expenditures.

Private Insurance companies run between 11 and 15% for those same costs.  Why?  Profit motive, advertising, corporate jets, corporate pay, sponsorship of PGA tournaments, and more.

Er, uh... can you use a better example than social security?   

HEY!!!!     I got no beef with the sponsored PGA tourneys.   

[Dos Equis]

Government is a vessel...an edifice.  It has no ego.  It is not corrupt.  The people that occupy the offices of government can be corrupt or become corrupted.  There are systems for checking the exercise of power.  That's how we learn of the cases to which you refer.


I'm saying that we cannot trust our health care to private, profit driven, interests.  The general cycle for this sort of market driven provision of services is this:

1.  private competition drives down the price of service and raises the level of quality.

2.  Private companies start to win out over other private companies

3.  Competition is reduced.

4.  In an effort to cut prices and improve the bottom line, the Larger companies slash quality

5.  In an effort to improve the bottom line, the larger companies overtake the smaller competitors until only a few giant organizations exist

6.  These giant organizations start to raise prices while the quality stays in the crapper and the bottom line stays large. 

7.  These giant organizations then endear themselves to the lawmakers so that things stay the same:  corrupt.

Cable TV, Telephone services or Microsoft or Intel.....


Let me know if I got that list 1-7 wrong.

Yes this happens, but no. 1 happens a lot too ("private competition drives down the price of service and raises the level of quality.").  Many companies who produce inferior products and services suffer. 

But when you are the government, you are god.  Your service can suck, your products can stink, and there is really nothing the consumer can do about it.  Who hasn't had an awful experience dealing with government workers?

When you remove the competition and accountability, you get complacency, bloat, sloth, and lousy service.     

[Decker]

Yes this happens, but no. 1 happens a lot too ("private competition drives down the price of service and raises the level of quality.").  Many companies who produce inferior products and services suffer. 

But when you are the government, you are god.  Your service can suck, your products can stink, and there is really nothing the consumer can do about it.  Who hasn't had an awful experience dealing with government workers?

When you remove the competition and accountability, you get complacency, bloat, sloth, and lousy service.     

Generally I agree with your assessment which I think is consistent with my analysis--competition in the marketplace is a good thing (which is why we have anti-trust laws).  But healthcare is not a car or cable television.  However the marketplace has failed horribly.

We can already see in black and white that universal healthcare is cheaper and more effective than our outdated privatized version--the US is ranked 37th best in the world and Britain is ranked 17 or 18 and Britain's per person cost for healthcare is 40% of that for the US.

We are removing competition on a limited basis insofar as paying one's doctor bills is concerned (choice of doctors, under most versions will still be available), but accountability will be present.  There are people for that in the government too.  That's how we find out about the $700 hammers and such.

[Dos Equis]

Generally I agree with your assessment which I think is consistent with my analysis--competition in the marketplace is a good thing (which is why we have anti-trust laws).  But healthcare is not a car or cable television.  However the marketplace has failed horribly.

We can already see in black and white that universal healthcare is cheaper and more effective than our outdated privatized version--the US is ranked 37th best in the world and Britain is ranked 17 or 18 and Britain's per person cost for healthcare is 40% of that for the US.

We are removing competition on a limited basis insofar as paying one's doctor bills is concerned (choice of doctors, under most versions will still be available), but accountability will be present.  There are people for that in the government too.  That's how we find out about the $700 hammers and such.

We agree on the marketplace and the necessity of antitrust laws. 

I tend to agree with Benfun who said earlier that "Health Care is a service like anything else." 

Is socialized medicine cheaper?  I can't see how, when you look at a place like Canada that takes about half of what you earn when you start to become successful.  That's really punitive, particularly for those who don't use healthcare services much.

I really don't see a plausible scenario where putting the feds in charge of a newly created government healthcare agency will not cost us more money.  Democrats are already admitting this will be paid for on the backs of the people who already pay most of the taxes in this country.  It's a monster waiting to happen.  Remember this?   http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0051418/  That's what a new government agency like this will do:  eat and continue to grow.     

[Decker]

We agree on the marketplace and the necessity of antitrust laws. 

I tend to agree with Benfun who said earlier that "Health Care is a service like anything else." 

Is socialized medicine cheaper?  I can't see how, when you look at a place like Canada that takes about half of what you earn when you start to become successful.  That's really punitive, particularly for those who don't use healthcare services much.

I really don't see a plausible scenario where putting the feds in charge of a newly created government healthcare agency will not cost us more money.  Democrats are already admitting this will be paid for on the backs of the people who already pay most of the taxes in this country.  It's a monster waiting to happen.  Remember this?   http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0051418/  That's what a new government agency like this will do:  eat and continue to grow.     

The Blob....hahahah.   It costs this country more to cover the catastrophic illnesses of 44 million uninsured people under a privatized scheme than it does to cover them in the first place. 

Universal healthcare will cost money but having a healthy society is like having an educated society--it pays dividends far beyond the investment.

I still can't get over the superior system in the UK--40% cheaper than the US w/ much better results.

It costs less than our system but has much better results.

[24KT]

What countries are laughing at us?  Would it be those same countries whose people keep flooding our borders? 

I'd hardly look to Canada as an example.  I've heard about numerous problems with that system.  For instance, people having to travel hundreds of miles for treatment.  And they get taxed up the wazoo. 

Travelling hundreds of miles for treatment hat has to do with population density rather than inefficiency.
in a system like what you propose, there would be no medical services to be had, let alone travelled hundreds of miles for because the population in some parts is just too spread out to support it. 

Part of the problem with socialism is contained in Hillary's plan:  raise taxes on some, give the proceeds to others.  I don't want the government redistributing wealth in that fashion.  We (the tax payers) already pay for county hospitals, clinics, Medicare, Medicaid, state programs, etc.  I don't want the government creating another bureaucratic monster, particularly when it will be funded in part on the backs of some tax payers. 

How is that any different from what Bush has done... other than the fact that what Bush has done has been to raise taxes on those most ill-equipped to afford it? At least those upon whom Hilary would raise taxes are those who can afford it.

Socialism is also antithetical to capitalism.  It is capitalism that is partly responsible for the greatness of this country.

And it's socialism that allows your fire departments, and police departments to do what they do in your respective communities. 

When has socialism ever produced a vibrant, healthy country where the people thrive – and aren’t trying to flee?     

{cough} Canada. While not entirely socialist, ...it does have some areas that tend towards socialism, providing a social safety net for those who fall through the capitalist cracks. It at least allows them to get back up in the game.

[Dos Equis]

Travelling hundreds of miles for treatment hat has to do with population density rather than inefficiency.
in a system like what you propose, there would be no medical services to be had, let alone travelled hundreds of miles for because the population in some parts is just too spread out to support it. 

How is that any different from what Bush has done... other than the fact that what Bush has done has been to raise taxes on those most ill-equipped to afford it? At least those upon whom Hilary would raise taxes are those who can afford it.

And it's socialism that allows your fire departments, and police departments to do what they do in your respective communities. 

{cough} Canada. While not entirely socialist, ...it does have some areas that tend towards socialism, providing a social safety net for those who fall through the capitalist cracks. It at least allows them to get back up in the game.

Not saying I don't believe you, but I've heard contrary facts from far more credible Canadians. 

When did Bush "raise taxes on those most ill-equipped to afford it"?  Hillary wants to play class warfare.  I'm not surprised you support her socialist agenda, given that you are a socialist. 

You are comparing fire and police departments to socialized medicine?  That's ridiculous.  Police and fire are run by local governments, not a massive federal government agency. 

You Canadians get fleeced by your government IMO.  I wouldn't live anywhere that takes half or more of what I earn.  There is no incentive. 

[24KT]

Not saying I don't believe you, but I've heard contrary facts from far more credible Canadians. 

But you do not know because you do not live here, and have no experience with it, so your "hearsay" is irrelevant.

When did Bush "raise taxes on those most ill-equipped to afford it"?

 

Holy Cow, ...where have you been for the past 8 years? your comments are sometimes just too stupid to dignify.

Hillary wants to play class warfare.  I'm not surprised you support her socialist agenda, given that you are a socialist.

I am no socialist, but I am a human being with compassion, ...and some things are just plain wrong.
How some people can turn a blind eye to them and play stupid is beyond me. 

You are comparing fire and police departments to socialized medicine?  That's ridiculous.  Police and fire are run by local governments, not a massive federal government agency.

Whether local or federal, ...it is still a government provided service. Perhaps if your governments weren't always such colossal screw-ups that sodomized the public at every opportunity, you might not be as vehemently opposed to governments handling anything. Not all governments are as greedy, corrupt, or as inefficient as your own. 

You Canadians get fleeced by your government IMO. I wouldn't live anywhere that takes half or more of what I earn.  There is no incentive. 

You say that like Bush & the neotaints have been paragons of virtue. You guys are beyond fleeced!
You've been screwed & tattooed! Sodomized without KY, ...and you don't even realize it!
Your butt-hole must have been so pre-stretched from so many previous buggerings you don't even notice anymore.

My government may have high taxes for those too ignorant to properly structure their affairs,
...but at least we get something of value for that money, ...like liveable cities, healthcare etc...

What have you gotten for all your taxes except dead soldiers, pillaged treasuries, a trashed constitution, global animosity, and trillions in debt for generations to come, bullshit upon more bullshit. You can't even travel the world and tell people you're American without running the risk of being spat on.

[Dos Equis]

But you do not know because you do not live here, and have no experience with it, so your "hearsay" is irrelevant.

 

Holy Cow, ...where have you been for the past 8 years? your comments are sometimes just too stupid to dignify.

I am no socialist, but I am a human being with compassion, ...and some things are just plain wrong.
How some people can turn a blind eye to them and play stupid is beyond me. 

Whether local or federal, ...it is still a government provided service. Perhaps if your governments weren't always such colossal screw-ups that sodomized the public at every opportunity, you might not be as vehemently opposed to governments handling anything. Not all governments are as greedy, corrupt, or as inefficient as your own. 

You say that like Bush & the neotaints have been paragons of virtue. You guys are beyond fleeced!
You've been screwed & tattooed! Sodomized without KY, ...and you don't even realize it!
Your butt-hole must have been so pre-stretched from so many previous buggerings you don't even notice anymore.

My government may have high taxes for those too ignorant to properly structure their affairs,
...but at least we get something of value for that money, ...like liveable cities, healthcare etc...

What have you gotten for all your taxes except dead soldiers, pillaged treasuries, a trashed constitution, global animosity, and trillions in debt for generations to come, bullshit upon more bullshit. You can't even travel the world and tell people you're American without running the risk of being spat on.

Yes, you are a socialist. 

You live in lala land.  Despite your America hatred, we still lead the world in immigration.  People are still dying to come here.  We are still the world's lone super power.  We have a plethora of livable cities.  I live in one.  It has clean air, low crime, and beautiful people.   

But you didn't answer my question:  Keeping in mind that the president has no power to raise taxes (he can only sign or veto legislation in this regard), when did Bush "raise taxes on those most ill-equipped to afford it"?

[Dos Equis]

Give me a break. Medicine is socialized already in America, who the hell do you think pays for the uninsured? The people who have insurance  thats who, and that is why our rates are so high.

I don't know about her plan but this country needs one. 

No it isn't.  The government doesn't dictate my medical plan or my doctors.

We don't really know why rates are so.  I've heard a number of theories, including medical malpractice lawsuits.  My view is insurance companies are just greedy.  The largest provider in Hawaii (HMSA) had a half billion dollar reserve and was still raising rates. 

I know enough about Hillary's plan to know I don't like it.   

[Dos Equis]

You need to read before you post. We pay for them and we pay taxes so it's the same paychecks covering the bums. As for who dictates your medical plan it is the massive corporations who back the politicians the the people elect....ie the government.

Like I said socialized medicine is already here.

lol.  You mean I need to agree with you before I post.  Sounds like you have a different definition of socialized medicine.  You are actually making an argument I've made on here several times:  our tax dollars already pay for state and county hospitals, local clinics, Medicare, Medicaid and their state equivalents.  Is that a form of socialized medicine?  In a sense, because those who cannot afford to pay don't have many choices and the government controls those services. 

But can I choose whichever health plan and/or doctor I want right now without government intervention?  Yes.  Even though I might go to the doctor about once every three years or so, I choose where I go, not the government.   

[Decker]

lol.  You mean I need to agree with you before I post.  Sounds like you have a different definition of socialized medicine.  You are actually making an argument I've made on here several times:  our tax dollars already pay for state and county hospitals, local clinics, Medicare, Medicaid and their state equivalents.  Is that a form of socialized medicine?  In a sense, because those who cannot afford to pay don't have many choices and the government controls those services. 

But can I choose whichever health plan and/or doctor I want right now without government intervention?  Yes.  Even though I might go to the doctor about once every three years or so, I choose where I go, not the government.   

Which universal healthcare plan dictates what clinic or doctor you visit?

So if we already pay for emergency care for 'everyone', why should we continue to pad the profit margins of private insurers for healthcare?

Why not just eliminate/marginalize them and enable true UC which provides better per person results at 40% of the cost of the private system?

[xxxLinda]

But you do not know

You can't even travel the world and tell people you're American without running the risk of being spat on.

...That's not hatred for Americans, that's the pure plain simple truth and we all feel so very sorry for you.

(I'm British, living in London, but I have an "American" accent (having lived in Canada for many years.  So when people ask (always derisively) what part of America I'm from, I scream >>>Hello? CANADA!!!  Of course, they've never met a Canadian before, noone in their right mind leaves that gorgeous country.


Whoever is attempting to sort out your health service ought to take the time to look at how it works in Canada and Britain.

But on the other hand, someone in my country ought to have a quick peek at how immigration is handled in North America.   When my father applied to emigrate to Canada from Britain in the 1970s, we had to qualify.  We even had to go to Canada House in Trafalgar Square and do a quiz on the names of the great lakes and the prime ministers.

(But Canada House is now a Texan steak restaurant)

History 101:  Britain was once "the commonwealth" and because of that dominance we now owe the rest of the world. 

So nowadays everyone can come here from everywhere and learn English and while they're at it, they can get brilliant free health care.  The cost of living here is the highest on the planet and so are the taxes.