Wandering the information superhighway, he came upon the last refuge of civilization, PoFo, the only forum on the internet ...
Then there would be no choice or competition at all. That is called a monopoly.
That is not the best answer and neither is Obamacare. I believe Capitalism and the market base system is best for healthcare, except for those that actually need welfare. I believe we must make sure there is much competition in the healthcare industry in every part of the country.
DrLee wrote:No its not. Medicare is a single payer system and I can't turn my television on without seeing yet another company trying to get my medicare dollars. Canada is a single payer system of sorts and it has a thriving competition for those dollars.
You just know that at some point, someone in your family is going to become critically ill. It's nice to know you won't lose everything you own, that your kids will get your house, not your doctor. And we pay less.
Also, to Dr Lee, I suspect the difference in outcome is a direct result of (a) universal application and (b) housekeeping within hospitals that affect post operative infections.
Drlee wrote:Medicare is a single payer system and I can't turn my television on without seeing yet another company trying to get my medicare dollars. Canada is a single payer system of sorts and it has a thriving competition for those dollars.
Drlee wrote:We tried it your way. Here is what happened.
1. The insurance companies denied coverage to anyone who needed it.
2. The insurance companies got the federal government to insure all of the sick and old people they did not want to cover.
3. We pay a higher percentage of our GDP than any other country BY FAR and do not cover even close to everyone. We pay more individually than in any developed country.
4. The so-called free market system brought us horrible outcomes. Our people do not even know what good health care looks like.
5. There is absolutely no way you are going to get free market health care and the republicans are not even thinking of offering it. Their bill is a sham. It does not open markets. It does not even allow the federal government to negotiate drug prices.
6. There are however a lot of monumentally stupid people who have been fooled but their sellout to lobbying money and the wealthy.
Regarding hospital acquired infections. Canada reports 1 in 9 patients getting these infections and our CDC says something like 1 in 25. The problem is that you may be telling the truth. Or at least more of it. The numbers in the US are disturbingly varied. In the US our number three cause of death is pneumonia. About 25% more people die of this in the US than in Canada.
Part of our longevity problem is people living in poverty. Your poverty rate is 9.1% and ours is over 15%. And, of course, our people living in poverty frequently access substandard health care if any. You do not have that problem.
The take-away for our free-market health care morons is this. For less than 1/2 of what we pay per person for health care your life expectancy is 82 years and ours is 79. Health care is not the entire story but it is the biggest part of it.
hindsight wrote:And both the Social Security and medicare funds are in danger not being enough to cover future retirees.
I am not sure how we get Medicaid dollars for those that never paid a dime and probably never will. I guess that comes from both the federal and state governments stealing money from hard working people by collecting more taxes or borrowing more money so the federal government is $20,000,000,000 in debt now. How much more in debt do you wish for us to go so those that can't or don't want to work can get free healthcare?
Stormsmith wrote:Again, going single payer will cover everyone at half the price. You can pay down your debt with the rest. And BTW, unemployment is at a record low.
Ter wrote:To get back on topic:
Even long after Trump will be gone, the news media that were supposed to be trustworthy will continued to be considered partisan to at least 50% of the American people and beyond to the world wide audience.
I specifically mention CNN, New York Times and the Washington Post.
The New Yorker and The Atlantic are not far behind them in partisanship.
ingliz wrote:The point of the video isn't to show Obama speaking about Obamacare. The point is, using a sophisticated computer programme, you can make Obama appear to say anything you please.
It must have done; it fooled you.
Anyway, the point of the video was to make him look and sound better, not to make him say anything one chooses.
Artificial intelligence software could generate highly realistic fake videos of former president Barack Obama using existing audio and video clips of him, a new study finds. [...] The researchers were careful to not generate videos where they put words in Obama's mouth that he did not at some other time utter himself. However, such fake videos are “likely possible soon,” says study lead author Supasorn Suwajanakorn, a computer scientist at the University of Washington.
One Degree wrote:[W]e are not real people, just actors reciting our lines.
It has nothing to do with the topic.
The trading of securities on the secondary stock […]
@Rancid What you are seeing in action is that[…]
Helps if you can read... This is a combination of[…]