What's new
By:

Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (democratic socialist) wins NY primary

  • Thread starter Thread starter Deleted member 848
  • Start date Start date
Zombie said:
I would agree except for that American politics is in absolutely no danger of trending toward state socialism and the GOP effort to demonize universal Healthcare as socialism has fallen flat and is more popular amongst the electorate than ever before.
Click to expand...
I don't want to support universal health care (single payer) but I do. The reason I do is because our health insurance system is so completely and utterly ****ed up.

Every damn time I need to use my health insurance it's like the people doing the billing have to figure **** out like it's the first time they've ever billed anyone ever and there's like quantum physics level math involved or something. So that's the fun on the billing side, then there's the fun when your insurer acts like you don't actually have insurance, at least not for the thing you just used it for, aka basic health care services. It's like everyone is making this **** hard on purpose, and I do think they make it hard on purpose.

Not only the stupidity involved in how confused everyone who does this **** for a living seems to get every time you use your insurance, but the opaque nature of what **** is going to cost. My wife needed an MRI recently. They told her it would cost about $600 out of pocket. So they were really close, it actually cost just shy of $1000 out of pocket. When she called to question it they were like "well we don't know exactly what you'll need until you come in." What? She needed a ****ing MRI, she has Blue Cross/Blue Shield insurance, where was the mystery?

Anyway, rant over. I want a system that doesn't take 10 people to figure out how to bill and pay for services that one doctor gives to one patient.
 
Zombie said:
I would agree except for that American politics is in absolutely no danger of trending toward state socialism and the GOP effort to demonize universal Healthcare as socialism has fallen flat and is more popular amongst the electorate than ever before.
Click to expand...

I would say that we are already managing the market to benefit the elite. The last thing I want is for the government to be given a mandate to actively manage and interfere in the market more. I think Democratic Socialism will gift them that. In the long run we could end up with something much more extreme.

Zombie said:
I would agree except for that American politics is in absolutely no danger of trending toward state socialism and the GOP effort to demonize universal Healthcare as socialism has fallen flat and is more popular amongst the electorate than ever before.
Click to expand...

No it's not(universal healthcare). Democrats have been urged by top leadership to avoid that term. Cuz the GOP successfully painted the effort as a Marxist takeover of the US. "Medicare for All" is what people want.
 
Last edited:
♪alt13 said:
I would say that we are already managing the market to benefit the elite. The last thing I want is for the government to be given a mandate to actively manage and interfere in the market more. I think Democratic Socialism will gift them that. In the long run we could end up with something much more extreme.



No it's not(universal healthcare). Democrats have been urged by top leadership to avoid that term. Cuz the GOP successfully painted the effort as a Marxist takeover of the US. "Medicare for All" is what people want.
Click to expand...


A lot of people are gonna meet IRMAA if Medicare for all passes.
 
Stoked said:
A lot of people are gonna meet IRMAA if Medicare for all passes.
Click to expand...

Lol

Reduce chapter 11 Bankruptcy by an *** ton
Reduce the amount we all pay

Nope cuz some people will pay more than others(even though it is still cheaper for them too)

Srsly noone is forced to apply for medicare and yet they still do despite IRMAA, cuz it is still cheaper.

What an awful argumemt
 
♪alt13 said:
Lol

Reduce chapter 11 Bankruptcy by an *** ton
Reduce the amount we all pay

Nope cuz some people will pay more than others(even though it is still cheaper for them too)

Srsly noone is forced to apply for medicare and yet they still do despite IRMAA, cuz it is still cheaper.

What an awful argumemt
Click to expand...

It wasn’t an argument ya twit. It was a statement of conditional fact.

Also, you’re right. You’re not forced to apply for Medicare. But many are automatically enrolled. And of you don’t take it originally you get penalized for taking it later. Certain exclusions apply of course.

Then there is the whole State Buy In programs for Medicaid recipients.
 
Last edited:
Stoked said:
It wasn’t an argument ya twit. It was a statement of conditional fact.

Also, you’re right. You’re not forced to apply for Medicare. But many are automatically enrolled. And of you don’t take it originally you get penalized for taking it later. Certain exclusions apply of course.

Then there is the whole State Buy In programs for Medicaid recipients.
Click to expand...

Turn that hyper sensitive find any fault eye toward private insurance and get back to me, ya twit
 
♪alt13 said:
Turn that hyper sensitive find any fault eye toward private insurance and get back to me, ya twit
Click to expand...

Turn your desire for an argument somewhere else. If you don’t like a statement of fact that’s your problem. Not mine.
 
Bulletproof said:
Honest question because I don't know...

Does "Medicare for all" mean universal single payer health care? If not, what does it mean?
Click to expand...

Well, earlier in this thread a few posters were complaining about medicare as socialism. Which my response to that is, “what’s wrong with medicare health care?”

I’m not talking about the UK’s socialized health care system where most hospitals and clinics are owned by the government. (Which again, what’s wrong with that?)

I’m talking about Canada’s form of health care where the country pools taxes into one health insurance (Medicare) which then pays for private doctors, practices, and clinics. Which essentially functions as our medicare system, except it’s for everyone rather than just the old. What’s wrong with that?

Both the UK’s system (which is true socialized medicine) and Canada’s spends less than we do, provides better outcomes for patients, and covers everyone. Yeah yeah yeah, non-emergency operations might have longer waiting periods, but so what? At least you’ll get the operation without facing bankruptcy. Can’t we invest in health care to lower waiting periods? Isn’t the fact that no country is rushing from socialized health care to our dysfunctional form an obvious sign that our form sucks?

Why should your health care depend on your ability to work and get and maintain insurance? Why should this burden be placed solely on workers and employers? Why should employers determine your health care? Why should insurance adjusters be able to determine what they will and will not cover when you’re sick? Why should big pharm be able to jack up medicine prices 1000+ percent without the government having the ability to regulate and set prices so sick people aren’t left out in the cold? Why are we the only industrialized nation in the world to permit its population to: (a) go without health care (b) lose its savings and file for bankruptcy because they get sick?

I just don’t understand why people think socialized medicine is bad. We socialize other necessities, like police, fire, security, and education. Why not health care?

Is this another one of those issues like climate change where one side is going to completely ignore scientists and mountains of evidence because they don’t want to admit that they’re wrong?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page
Back
Top