At least several countries with national health care systems still have an element of private health care. Another fake arguement against Health Care for All.
The dark side of capitalism occurs when instead of profiting just from value-adding services, we start profiting from essential services that should be a right, not a paid privilege. My mother-in-law had dementia after a stroke and lost her home plus her life’s savings for assisted living expenses when we were no longer able to care for her ourselves. What was/is frightening was that she had twice what we have for retirement savings and it was all consumed.
To have so much money out of circulation, hoarded as an acquisition by the wealthy, is a sign of a very non-functional society. None of the ‘isms do well alone. It’s time for a hybrid economy that will sustain the entire population and truly value and appreciate their productivity efforts, not just pass their gains on to the wealthy at the top end of the income spectrum … the only ones who can afford America’s healthcare.
Ted seems to be confusing the current iteration of Medicare with the proposed Medicare for All. The Medicare for All proposals I’ve seen expands coverage in addition to expanding who is covered.
This illustrates why the phrase “Medicare For All” is misleading. Medicare has already been corrupted through “Medicare Advantage” plans and “Medicare Part D”. Both of those are just privatization. “Single payer” should be the catchphrase, not “Medicare For All”. (Which would, I understand, require a change to the Senate bill, but not the House bill).
Hillary Clinton tried to change our health care system back in the 1990s when Bill was president. Had she won in 2016 we might well be on our way to health care for all. But some people bought the conservative attacks on Hillary and believed the baloney Bernie Sanders was peddling. Hillary Clinton was by no means perfect at ll, but she was surely better than those two.
Studies have shown that the USA has the highest cost of medical care in the world, by a huge margin: 50% higher per capita than #2. We do not get #1 healthcare to go with it, however; we’re somewhere around 27th or so, and we still don’t even cover everyone. There ARE more efficient ways, and every other industrialized nation in the world uses them. The idea that somehow there are no other solutions is pernicious nonsense promoted by the ignorant and the greedy who benefit.
The problem with “Medicare for All” as currently described and for that matter Romneycare/Obamacare is that it relies on the existing network of insurance providers.
In 1992, I attended the Catholic Healthcare Association conference. In the keynote address the following statement was made: “the #1 obstacle to providing affordable healthcare to all Americans is the insurance industry. Period.” And there we are.
My Grandmother had a Stroke and spent 15 years in a Home. She had worked very hard to set up for a nice retirement She died with a 100 bucks to Her name . We saw it for what it was paying for Her care such as it was. Why should the Government pay the Bills when the She had Money, they gutted Grandma Then picked up the Check for 14 years ? My Dad spent a lot of time hiding His Money so this can’t happen to Him.
This what I went through with my Mom. Used up all of te savings, sold the house, cashed in the puny life insurance, then medicare picked up nursing care. When she passed, medicare wanted reimbursing !!
Two things: Yes, one must use up all of your resources (but not your home!) before Medicaid will begin paying for your nursing home care. It happened to my aunt who I was the legal guardian and conservator for over the last eight years of her life. Most of her savings (and she had a lot) paid for an “assisted living” situation for six years, (private pay ONLY), then two years in a nursing home. The second year in that nursing home was paid for by Medicaid, after her own savings ran dry. I witnessed no change in the quality of her care. Medicaid was supplemented by most of her Social Security income, which the nursing home took directly from the government.Medicare for all, or single payer, those are entirely different things. One or the other are possible, but Medicaid would continue as is, as far as I know right now. I think. Maybe. Oh, hell, who knows!?
Unlike the other First World countries that have very good healthcare systems they are civilized, however here in the USA we are still barbarians. The very idea of having govt tax funds to take care of people when they are old an poor they consider Pagan! To them it is all wrong. That the idea of us being beholding to govt is horrible and that we are just slaves to govt. Well don’t we own the govt? Don’t we control who gets in? Maybe not now.
Trump and his people are barbarians and like Hitler wear it proudly for to them that is the only way the adult way the best way possible for humans to be as cruel as Nature. To be free in that way.
We faced that with my mother. It turned out that in our / her case, having her live at home with a full time aid ran the money down just fast enough so that when she went into full time care elsewhere, she had gotten below the threshold. We sold the house to cover a little bit of the extra and every one of the sibs came out a few $thousand ahead after she passed. With the accent on “few”.
One of the advantages of medicare for all is that we have a vote on coverage and expense. I do wonder why we haven’t used the vote to require negotiation of medicare drug prices.
I don’t know any proposal that eliminates Ted’s first frame, the Medicaid spend-down for those doomed to government-funded Long Term Care. Medicaid expansion could make that doom a little less pitiful, though. Right?
Darsan54 Premium Member almost 5 years ago
Aaaaaah, capitalism at its finest.
You know, statistically they have way better healthcare results and access in Cuba.
DonPoole almost 5 years ago
I know you’re in a hurry, Ted. That’s one of the discussions we finally seem to be having.
mourdac Premium Member almost 5 years ago
At least several countries with national health care systems still have an element of private health care. Another fake arguement against Health Care for All.
superposition almost 5 years ago
The dark side of capitalism occurs when instead of profiting just from value-adding services, we start profiting from essential services that should be a right, not a paid privilege. My mother-in-law had dementia after a stroke and lost her home plus her life’s savings for assisted living expenses when we were no longer able to care for her ourselves. What was/is frightening was that she had twice what we have for retirement savings and it was all consumed.
To have so much money out of circulation, hoarded as an acquisition by the wealthy, is a sign of a very non-functional society. None of the ‘isms do well alone. It’s time for a hybrid economy that will sustain the entire population and truly value and appreciate their productivity efforts, not just pass their gains on to the wealthy at the top end of the income spectrum … the only ones who can afford America’s healthcare.
Jason Allen almost 5 years ago
Ted seems to be confusing the current iteration of Medicare with the proposed Medicare for All. The Medicare for All proposals I’ve seen expands coverage in addition to expanding who is covered.
Kalkkuna almost 5 years ago
It will have to be Medicare for All Who Want It.
Wlly Blly almost 5 years ago
This happened to my grandmother. She had to bankrupt herself to get taken care of. I never have been able to understand this.
Malcolm Hall almost 5 years ago
But in Cuba you can’t own a gun!
Cerabooge almost 5 years ago
This illustrates why the phrase “Medicare For All” is misleading. Medicare has already been corrupted through “Medicare Advantage” plans and “Medicare Part D”. Both of those are just privatization. “Single payer” should be the catchphrase, not “Medicare For All”. (Which would, I understand, require a change to the Senate bill, but not the House bill).
ncorgbl almost 5 years ago
Hillary Clinton tried to change our health care system back in the 1990s when Bill was president. Had she won in 2016 we might well be on our way to health care for all. But some people bought the conservative attacks on Hillary and believed the baloney Bernie Sanders was peddling. Hillary Clinton was by no means perfect at ll, but she was surely better than those two.
You get what you pay for.
patrickab7 almost 5 years ago
Bernie isn’t the right choice either? Then who is? Just don’t vote and hope it works itself out?
Motivemagus almost 5 years ago
Studies have shown that the USA has the highest cost of medical care in the world, by a huge margin: 50% higher per capita than #2. We do not get #1 healthcare to go with it, however; we’re somewhere around 27th or so, and we still don’t even cover everyone. There ARE more efficient ways, and every other industrialized nation in the world uses them. The idea that somehow there are no other solutions is pernicious nonsense promoted by the ignorant and the greedy who benefit.
The problem with “Medicare for All” as currently described and for that matter Romneycare/Obamacare is that it relies on the existing network of insurance providers.
In 1992, I attended the Catholic Healthcare Association conference. In the keynote address the following statement was made: “the #1 obstacle to providing affordable healthcare to all Americans is the insurance industry. Period.” And there we are.
RalphConti almost 5 years ago
Love the Clash shirt and heard the same message. you are dead on target with this one.
Ammo is busy training in the hills Premium Member almost 5 years ago
My Grandmother had a Stroke and spent 15 years in a Home. She had worked very hard to set up for a nice retirement She died with a 100 bucks to Her name . We saw it for what it was paying for Her care such as it was. Why should the Government pay the Bills when the She had Money, they gutted Grandma Then picked up the Check for 14 years ? My Dad spent a lot of time hiding His Money so this can’t happen to Him.
oldlegodad71 almost 5 years ago
This what I went through with my Mom. Used up all of te savings, sold the house, cashed in the puny life insurance, then medicare picked up nursing care. When she passed, medicare wanted reimbursing !!
phredturner almost 5 years ago
The Merican way
TaximanSteve almost 5 years ago
Well, more and more Americans are opting out early. Like Willy Loman…
Radish the wordsmith almost 5 years ago
Lots of people go bankrupt every year over medical bills, this does not happen in most other countries.
Dems are called socialist and communist because they want to change this.
larry Premium Member almost 5 years ago
Two things: Yes, one must use up all of your resources (but not your home!) before Medicaid will begin paying for your nursing home care. It happened to my aunt who I was the legal guardian and conservator for over the last eight years of her life. Most of her savings (and she had a lot) paid for an “assisted living” situation for six years, (private pay ONLY), then two years in a nursing home. The second year in that nursing home was paid for by Medicaid, after her own savings ran dry. I witnessed no change in the quality of her care. Medicaid was supplemented by most of her Social Security income, which the nursing home took directly from the government.Medicare for all, or single payer, those are entirely different things. One or the other are possible, but Medicaid would continue as is, as far as I know right now. I think. Maybe. Oh, hell, who knows!?
Night-Gaunt49[Bozo is Boffo] almost 5 years ago
Unlike the other First World countries that have very good healthcare systems they are civilized, however here in the USA we are still barbarians. The very idea of having govt tax funds to take care of people when they are old an poor they consider Pagan! To them it is all wrong. That the idea of us being beholding to govt is horrible and that we are just slaves to govt. Well don’t we own the govt? Don’t we control who gets in? Maybe not now.
Trump and his people are barbarians and like Hitler wear it proudly for to them that is the only way the adult way the best way possible for humans to be as cruel as Nature. To be free in that way.
Concretionist almost 5 years ago
We faced that with my mother. It turned out that in our / her case, having her live at home with a full time aid ran the money down just fast enough so that when she went into full time care elsewhere, she had gotten below the threshold. We sold the house to cover a little bit of the extra and every one of the sibs came out a few $thousand ahead after she passed. With the accent on “few”.
theherb95 almost 5 years ago
One of the advantages of medicare for all is that we have a vote on coverage and expense. I do wonder why we haven’t used the vote to require negotiation of medicare drug prices.
SwimsWithSharks almost 5 years ago
It’s hard to make generalizations about Medicare-for-all because there are so many proposals.
https://www.vox.com/2018/12/13/18103087/medicare-for-all-explained-single-payer-health-care-sanders-jayapal
I don’t know any proposal that eliminates Ted’s first frame, the Medicaid spend-down for those doomed to government-funded Long Term Care. Medicaid expansion could make that doom a little less pitiful, though. Right?