Jump to content

2020 Democratic Nominee

used2b

By used2b
in Cloak Room

 Share

Recommended Posts

David Dennison

David Dennison 19441

Posted
Posted
42 minutes ago, Anastasis said:

It is an entirely different system, in terms of administration, financing, cost sharing, etc. What is dishonest is to piggyback on the beneficiary satisfaction associated with the current Medicare system to support a total revamp of the system into something totally different.  

But it's what's going to happen eventually. A lot of us just want to get on with it and rip the band-aid off. Employer provided healthcare's days are numbered.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • Replies 23.3k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

  • bad_teammate

    3638

  • Hugo Stiglitz

    2212

  • Hank Kingsley

    1252

  • Js1

    1230

Popular Days

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Popular Posts

Huckleberry
Huckleberry

No it doesn't, this is absurd selfishness on a grand scale. Nobody is getting punished. My wife and I paid off our student loans, and you know what I think about younger people or even those in our ge

henrygandorf
henrygandorf

i’ve really enjoyed the 900 posts from bt explaining how bernie people aren’t aggressive, obsessive, and very-online.  truly a learning experience. 

Bill Clinton
Bill Clinton

3rd or 4th thread but whos counting.  Name recognition and ability to collect money is most important to the Democratic Party. They aren't trying to win 2020, they are trying to rebuild and colle

Posted Images

bad_teammate

bad_teammate 13479

Posted
Posted
2/3 of hospitals lose money with Medicare patients, and I imagine 100% lose money on Medicaid. Are we ok that many hospitals under M4A will either face closure or lowering care to meet their new cost structure?  The next natural step will be the govt taking over hospitals and their physician networks.  Is that what we want?
1) Hospitals as they are run now can be run more efficiently than they are now. Billions of dollars are wasted in supplies alone. There is plenty of fat to cut without impacting care.

2) raise payouts if necessary
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Hugo Stiglitz

Hugo Stiglitz 23367

Posted
Posted (edited)
13 minutes ago, David Dennison said:

Employer provided healthcare's days are numbered.

Hopefully.  This is one of the most latently oppressive practices in our society.  People settling for work as indentured servants for shitty healthcare coverage they believe is amazing. 

Edited by Hugo Stiglitz
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Nice Guy Eddie

Nice Guy Eddie 13707

Posted
Posted
18 minutes ago, bad_teammate said:

1) Hospitals as they are run now can be run more efficiently than they are now. Billions of dollars are wasted in supplies alone. There is plenty of fat to cut without impacting care.

2) raise payouts if necessary

I think every industry or company can always be more efficient but I’m skeptical that these hospitals have allowed themselves to be so inefficient that they are losing money mainly due to that inefficiency. Perhaps their flaw is that the doctors give Medicare patients the same level of care as the private insurance patients.  Maybe start a new plan: Pay with Medicare and you get 50% less time with the doc and nurses. That would lower costs for everyone.

honesty any operational efficiency expert would make that recommendation. However those pesky ethical rules stop it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
David Dennison

David Dennison 19441

Posted
Posted
1 minute ago, Nice Guy Eddie said:

I think every industry or company can always be more efficient but I’m skeptical that these hospitals have allowed themselves to be so inefficient that they are losing money mainly due to that inefficiency. Perhaps their flaw is that the doctors give Medicare patients the same level of care as the private insurance patients.  Maybe start a new plan: Pay with Medicare and you get 50% less time with the doc and nurses. That would lower costs for everyone.

honesty any operational efficiency expert would make that recommendation. However those pesky ethical rules stop it.

Or just don't treat Medicare patients at all. They are old as fuck and cost too much. That would also lower costs for everyone.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Bozo_Casanova

Bozo_Casanova 26773

Posted
Posted
Yes. And they all think about costs and services over the next 5 years and not about the following 25-30 years. The potential for profit drives innovation and advancement. It absolutely has gotten out of control in some areas but why not address those symptoms as opposed to destroying the entire system. That still reserves the right to destroy the entire system later on if all other options fail.

You’re touching what is really the fundamental problem with our system: it’s really a for-profit administration system, and care is the COGS.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
David Dennison

David Dennison 19441

Posted
Posted
3 minutes ago, Bozo_Casanova said:
33 minutes ago, David Dennison said:
But it's what's going to happen eventually. A lot of us just want to get on with it and rip the band-aid off. Employer provided healthcare's days are numbered.

Which does not require or even need to be facilitated by a government monopsony.

It would be nice if corporate America would just stop providing it. Who wants to go first?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Nice Guy Eddie

Nice Guy Eddie 13707

Posted
Posted
4 minutes ago, David Dennison said:

Or just don't treat Medicare patients at all. They are old as fuck and cost too much. That would also lower costs for everyone.

I wasn’t advocating that or the 50% plan but that Medicare is at best a break even business in healthcare. Care for all would drop drastically if everyone has Medicare.  Longer wait times. Fewer staff to help you. Less innovation. The for-profit and not-for-profit model in America props up the American and world health systems.

the current system needs changes but M4A ain’t the answer unless we want to drag down level of care. I would like to think that isn’t the goal but it would be the result.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
bad_teammate

bad_teammate 13479

Posted
Posted
16 minutes ago, Nice Guy Eddie said:

I think every industry or company can always be more efficient but I’m skeptical that these hospitals have allowed themselves to be so inefficient that they are losing money mainly due to that inefficiency.

You shouldn't be so skeptical, hospitals are inefficiently run.

Trim as much fat as possible without impacting care. Raise revenues to cover the cost if efficiency gains do not cover real costs.

Another factor is drug price controls so hospitals pay less for medication.

Quote

Perhaps their flaw is that the doctors give Medicare patients the same level of care as the private insurance patients.

Downward-facing class hostility is bad.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Bozo_Casanova

Bozo_Casanova 26773

Posted
Posted
A person dying of cancer isn't a fucking consumer.

Yes, they absolutely are. They just aren’t the buyer. And just because the service they are consuming is almost completely price inelastic doesn’t mean that it’s not a service, or the role of the consumer in making an informed choice isn’t just as crucial. In fact, it’s even more important because of the almost complete lack of a substitutional good. And our current system impairs almost all that, while restricting access and driving up costs.

 

I know this is the silly season and you’re busy caping for your favorite rich guy to be president, but I care more about fixing our miserable healthcare system than ideological bullshit or intramural beefs. You and Hugo seem dead set on repeating the last 25 years. That’s not radical or dramatic in the least.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Bozo_Casanova

Bozo_Casanova 26773

Posted
Posted

And by the way- if Warren was elected and a bill to implement their plan came up I would support it because it would be better than what we have today.

But of all the ways to achieve a universal healthcare system that has the outcome and cost effectiveness profile of the rest of the OECD, what Bernie and Warren are proposing are the most difficult to pass, take the longest to implement, and deliver the least benefit with the greatest downside.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
bad_teammate

bad_teammate 13479

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, Bozo_Casanova said:

... but I care more about fixing our miserable healthcare system than ideological bullshit or intramural beefs.

Yes, which is why you're constantly attacking the only existing real plans being pushed by actual legislators and talking about one that died a long time ago and no one is talking about or promoting anymore.

GETTING

THINGS

DONE

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Henry Hill

Henry Hill 3156

Posted
Posted
4 hours ago, Bozo_Casanova said:

And by the way- if Warren was elected and a bill to implement their plan came up I would support it because it would be better than what we have today.

But of all the ways to achieve a universal healthcare system that has the outcome and cost effectiveness profile of the rest of the OECD, what Bernie and Warren are proposing are the most difficult to pass, take the longest to implement, and deliver the least benefit with the greatest downside.

So dumb. Just cut the fat and administrative inefficiencies and increase claim payouts if it comes to that. Easy peasy lemon squeezy. If you disagree, you hate America and FREEDOM.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
 Share
Go to topic listing


Football ... Basketball ... Baseball ... Other Sports ... Futbol ... 🤫995🤫 ... Gambling ... Movies & TV ... Music ... Hobbies ... Lulz ... Food & Travel ... Daily Texan ... Business and Markets ... Cloak Room ... Help ... For Sale ... Board Discussion ... Subscribe!... Donate!... Advertise... COOKIE MONSTER!

×
×
  • Create New...