Bernie Sanders

[ElNono]

That's exactly it. The severe cost controls you're mentioning are utopian.

I see what you posted about other countries, but the proof is in the pudding. We're spending way, way more than any other country on healthcare, both on pharma and procedures and our outcomes are not drastically superior. Healthcare tourism is a thriving industry. What's more, at least as far as pharma goes, we're actually subsidizing the rest of the world. It's stupid and it has to change if you ever want to bring the costs down. We can argue that due to cronyism and money in politics it will never happen, but that doesn't make it any less right.

[z0sa]

this is just your way of saying that you aren't actually leaning conservative fiscally. if you lean conservative fiscally, then you'd think fiscal conservatism will lead to a better road ahead. if not, then you aren't leaning conservative.

No, i dont do black and white im this or im that. Thats partisan bull .

We follow a more socialist plan now, pay higher taxes, eliminate the deficit over time, eliminate TBTF bullsit, force companies to plan around their employees rather than just their bottom line while paying their fair sure.

When things are good again, the deficit is gone, people are off foodstamps, the tax loopholes have been eliminated, our money is worth something again, change to a more fiscally comservative plan - lower taxes as much as possible, promote business with decreased regulations (within reason), offer tax breaks (within reason enact legislature and elect politicians who can keep the budget relatively balanced, etc.

No one system works all the time. Thats why we have a mixed eonomy. As the pendulum swings, so should we, as a unit, as a NATION.

[vy65]

I see what you posted about other countries, but the proof is in the pudding. We're spending way, way more than any other country on healthcare, both on pharma and procedures and our outcomes are not drastically superior. Healthcare tourism is a thriving industry. What's more, at least as far as pharma goes, we're actually subsidizing the rest of the world. It's stupid and it has to change if you ever want to bring the costs down. We can argue that due to cronyism and money in politics it will never happen, but that doesn't make it any less right.

Agreed.

Now, the question is, does someone like Bernie spur the conversation to where it needs to go (i.e., what you identified above)? Or does he stifle conversation about pragmatic reforms with the promise of a utopian single-payer system?

[ElNono]

Also, "what's the tax bill" of other voters doesn't really matter, their votes have the same value as yours. This is why demographics and income inequality matter. It's great to be in the top 10% of income earners, but if the gap between that 10 and the other 90 becomes too wide, you're going to find yourself with a lot more Bernie Sanders and the votes to push them through (that said, I'm not saying we're there yet).

[DMX7]

We do subsidize the rest of the world on so many drugs. It's insane.

The other issue having an effect on our health and healthcare is the food we eat. Other countries eat junk food too but our insanely sugar loaded non-nutirious crap is consumed so much more here. It's like our culture to eat crap.

[rmt]

You think making the United States Government the middle man is going to reduce costs?

Why would you believe that? The US government is the most inefficient payor that has ever been conceived.

If you want to cut out the middle man, make everyone pay their own way, out of their own pocket. Get rid of all third party payors.

That would lower what we spend on healthcare a whole lot. You are on to something.

That's right. $80 diagnostic (above screening) mammogram and $80 bilateral breast ultrasound - CASH - couldn't believe it.

[vy65]

Also, "what's the tax bill" of other voters doesn't really matter, their votes have the same value as yours. This is why demographics and income inequality matter. It's great to be in the top 10% of income earners, but if the gap between that 10 and the other 90 becomes too wide, you're going to find yourself with a lot more Bernie Sanders and the votes to push them through (that said, I'm not saying we're there yet).

Disagree here. Never said that one's vote matters more or less than others.

When you're a single kid in your 20s, its easy to say "I'm for raising taxes." Basing policy on the whims of idealistic 20 year olds is a bad idea.

[z0sa]

You want to wean people off the government by making all healthcare and education free for all provided by the government?!?!!!

Not taken many classes that demand you draw logical conclusions yet, huh?

You do realize this is happening in other countries right?

[rmt]

We do subsidize the rest of the world on so many drugs. It's insane.

The other issue having an effect on our health and healthcare is the food we eat. Other countries eat junk food too but our insanely sugar loaded non-nutirious crap is consumed so much more here. It's like our culture to eat crap.

Part of it is the government's fault - their food pyramid with 11 servings of carbs at the bottom is terrible. Pushing low-fat, high carb diet was bad. IMO, it would be better to invert with fats and protein on the bottom and carbs at the top.

[101A]

I see what you posted about other countries, but the proof is in the pudding. We're spending way, way more than any other country on healthcare, both on pharma and procedures and our outcomes are not drastically superior. Healthcare tourism is a thriving industry. What's more, at least as far as pharma goes, we're actually subsidizing the rest of the world. It's stupid and it has to change if you ever want to bring the costs down. We can argue that due to cronyism and money in politics it will never happen, but that doesn't make it any less right.

This is all true. The problem is we are too busy fussing about HOW to pay for healthcare rather than talking about WHY it costs so much, and why we use so much of it.

1. We are the most medicated, most overweight, unhealthiest country on the planet. Therefore it takes more healthcare to keep us going (if you wreck your car more, it stands to reason you pay more for car repairs than someone who doesn't drive, right?)

2. The costs of our care ARE higher than other countries. Why? First, we have no price controls; all countries with socialized medicine DO have those (as do our Medicare and Medicaid systems). We should discuss this, but we do not. "Price Controls" don't sound as good as "Single Payor". Our doctors make MUCH more than doctors in other countries. Dentists in Germany (dental not socialized) make more than doctors (medical care is price controlled).

3. It would be more efficient to have a single pool of risk than the many pools split between different payors, however, if that single payor is the U.S. government, we need to look at ITS track record in efficiency to determine whether it would return the same efficiency that, say, Canada's does vs. just assuming it will.

4. Something not often discussed is the number of jobs provided by our "inefficient" system. There are still a lot of Americans, there are not, however, as many jobs as there used to be. Manufacturing is gone, farming is all but gone, middle management is a dinosaur, banks have consolidated - technology displacing people right and left. People need jobs - inefficient healthcare delivers those. Doctors, Nurse Practioners, RN's, LVN's, CNA's, office staff, insurance companies, agents, support staff in all those companies. It is damn inefficient, it's also a lot of unemployed if we go single payor.

[vy65]

The other issue having an effect on our health and healthcare is the food we eat. Other countries eat junk food too but our insanely sugar loaded non-nutirious crap is consumed so much more here. It's like our culture to eat crap.

I wonder if other countries have an equivalent of McDonald's and Coca-Cola deeply embedded in their culture. I haven't seen anything close in Europe, the ME, or Asia.

[DMX7]

Part of it is the government's fault - their food pyramid with 11 servings of carbs at the bottom is terrible. Pushing low-fat, high carb diet was bad. IMO, it would be better to invert with fats and protein on the bottom and carbs at the top.

As long as the government is controlled by special interests, we can't take seriously what it tells us to eat. It's why pizza (or at least the tomato paste) is considered a vegetable serving in school cafeterias.

[ElNono]

Agreed.

Now, the question is, does someone like Bernie spur the conversation to where it needs to go (i.e., what you identified above)? Or does he stifle conversation about pragmatic reforms with the promise of a utopian single-payer system?

He's running for President. He's taking one position that's very popular with the center-left in general, IMO, and running with it. Doesn't mean he doesn't believe in it (Even if I think he's flat out wrong on certain matters, I think he's genuine).

I'm sure he has tried to "spur the conversation" in Congress, but we both know it's a non-starter with how much money is in the balance.

That said, I think it's coming and inevitable. Even the UK, one of the last remaining bastions of conservatism has had universal healthcare for a long ass time. i might be dead before it comes to pass in America, but I think the marking is on the wall.

[101A]

You do realize this is happening in other countries right?

Yes. Doesn't change what I said, or the lack of logic in your statement.

[101A]

I wonder if other countries have an equivalent of McDonald's and Coca-Cola deeply embedded in their culture. I haven't seen anything close in Europe, the ME, or Asia.

I was shocked at the number of McDonalds and Burger Kings in Europe, actually. They were nearly as ubiquitous there as here. Europeans, however, don't have the "Supersize" on their menus.

[z0sa]

Yes. Doesn't change what I said, or the lack of logic in your statement.

Umm, it is a statement of fact. Apparently you think the best way for people to get off foodstamps involves something other than paying them more money (or, if in the future deflation occurs, paying them a living wage whatever that may be) and educating them so they can advance in their chosen professions. I guess good luck with that

[DMX7]

I wonder if other countries have an equivalent of McDonald's and Coca-Cola deeply embedded in their culture. I haven't seen anything close in Europe, the ME, or Asia.

I don't know, but even the fast food from American brands is often different there. Check out this McDonald's in Hong Kong:

[hater]

There are tons of McDonalds, etc in Europe and elsewhere. But so far ppl eat there rarely. It's a delicacy. Of course this is changing as the price becomes more affordable. But ppl usually eat a piece of fruit or a small sandwich overseas. Rarely they go to McDonalds.

On the other hand here in.the US even homeless ppl.binge on bigmacs fat mother ers

[z0sa]

And as for lowering healthcare costs... that is pretty much mutually exclusive with a private for profit HC industry. Theres not a simple answer, but mandating we all pay our insurance companies their premiums or else certainly isnt it.

[vy65]

I don't know, but even the fast food from American brands is often different there. Check out this McDonald's in Hong Kong:

That's crazy . The Japs know what's up.

[DMX7]

McDonalds does have a good presence in Europe. But you can find Americans who eat fast food 6 or 7 days a week. You don't see that in my experience in Europe all that much.

[101A]

Umm, it is a statement of fact. Apparently you think the best way for people to get off foodstamps involves something other than paying them more money (or, if in the future deflation occurs, paying them a living wage whatever that may be) and educating them so they can advance in their chosen professions. I guess good luck with that

You can't educate someone, they have to want to learn. You also can't make them want to work, they must have incentive and desire to do so. People need to have jobs that pay them a fair value for the work they are performing. They need to be proud of that work, and want to do that job better. I think trade schools are a great idea, as is the military. It think daycare assistance (extend the already functioning school system a few years younger is a simple way to do this) would be very helpful. Tax breaks for hiring/retaining and training employees is an idea worth looking at.

I already think there are too many people going to college/university. There aren't that many jobs that require a bachelor's degree. Again, look at Europe. I have specific knowledge of Germany. There, only 1/3 of students go to high school that even tracks them to college. Then only half of those graduates (now 1/6 of the 18 year olds) get to go to university. It is fully paid for, but over 80% of the population is barred from it. The rest go into trades. Apprentice/master. There, btw, the 1st Euro earned is taxed - and people must sell personal property before they are given "charity" (government assistance). The system works pretty well, but would be unpalatable on many levels in this country - to both the left and right.

[ElNono]

It's not just McDonalds... there's a lot in the ingredients too... things like High Fructose Corn Syrup which is used everywhere here, whereas in other countries pure cane sugar is cheaper, healthier and more readily available...

[ElNono]

This is all true. The problem is we are too busy fussing about HOW to pay for healthcare rather than talking about WHY it costs so much, and why we use so much of it.

1. We are the most medicated, most overweight, unhealthiest country on the planet. Therefore it takes more healthcare to keep us going (if you wreck your car more, it stands to reason you pay more for car repairs than someone who doesn't drive, right?)

2. The costs of our care ARE higher than other countries. Why? First, we have no price controls; all countries with socialized medicine DO have those (as do our Medicare and Medicaid systems). We should discuss this, but we do not. "Price Controls" don't sound as good as "Single Payor". Our doctors make MUCH more than doctors in other countries. Dentists in Germany (dental not socialized) make more than doctors (medical care is price controlled).

3. It would be more efficient to have a single pool of risk than the many pools split between different payors, however, if that single payor is the U.S. government, we need to look at ITS track record in efficiency to determine whether it would return the same efficiency that, say, Canada's does vs. just assuming it will.

4. Something not often discussed is the number of jobs provided by our "inefficient" system. There are still a lot of Americans, there are not, however, as many jobs as there used to be. Manufacturing is gone, farming is all but gone, middle management is a dinosaur, banks have consolidated - technology displacing people right and left. People need jobs - inefficient healthcare delivers those. Doctors, Nurse Practioners, RN's, LVN's, CNA's, office staff, insurance companies, agents, support staff in all those companies. It is damn inefficient, it's also a lot of unemployed if we go single payor.

True, but those jobs are going to get lost in the long run anyways, due to automation, etc, and you can argue you're getting less quality of health because an NP does 85% of your visit and your doctor can't even remember why you're visiting him.

[z0sa]

I agree wholeheartedly with trade schools being put front and center for many people. Many public ins utions do offer certificates and education similar to those, and i think by and large that area should be a key focus of any state provided or subsidized education plan. Thats definitely an area bernie never touches on that I strongly feel should be part of the discussion