As Republicans Start to Go Crazy Over the Federal Budget Deficit and the Looming Debt Ceiling, Remember that Recent History Shows Democrats Usually Decrease The Yearly Federal Deficit While In Office while Republicans Always Increase Them.

[Shoney'sPonyBoy 350]

15 hours ago, AU9377 said:

We are moving toward some form of basic universal coverage.  We have that now in many ways.  We simply call it by other names.  We have to get our priorities in line with our spending.  The money is already being spent, but too many times the actual patient is the last to benefit.  We have a system that treats the physical illness, but too many times leaves the patient bankrupt and strips them of their dignity.  The problem isn't with doctor compensation or care giver compensation.  The problem is really driven by big pharma and the large group of providers that feed at the public trough of taxpayer money. Lobbyists get more and more sweetheart deals stuffed into legislation in every budget.

Again, I don't find anything to disagree with there except that I'm not nearly as sure as you are that we're so close to universal coverage if by universal coverage you mean a government program.

The question is what to do about it all.

I personally do not believe that anyone has a right to health care services.  I do not believe that anyone has a right to anything that has to be provided by someone else involuntarily (to the point that I do not believe the right a jury trial is a legitimate right b/c it requires other citizens to be conscripted into service to fulfill it).

That said, I also do not have a problem with deciding as a nation that we'd like to help people out with health care who can't afford it and I believe in a country as wealthy as ours it would be the right thing to do.

But figuring out how to do so without having a deleterious effect on the system is no small feat.

Healthcare has three aspects:  Cost, coverage, and quality.  There is simply no way to positively influence one without negatively influencing at least one of the others, ceteris parabus.  If you lower cost, you compromise either coverage or quality or both.  If you increase coverage or quality you increase cost.  Etc.

Putting everyone on government insurance would be astronomically expensive without artificially controlling costs, and then you get into a situation in which you are flirting with fascism.  Obamacare was probably the single most fascist piece of American legislation passed, maybe ever, with the distinguishing characteristic of fascism being government not owning but controlling the means of production.  And Obamacare would be a far cry from what would happen if the government took over health insurance.

I know that there are mechanisms in place right now that artificially inflate drug prices and that sort of thing and of course they should be dismantled.  But even with all of that gone, I think the only way to do this if we want to commit to it as a country is to model the K-12 educational system.  It's a mixture of free market and socialism.

Just like we have public schools that anyone can attend and private schools that you have to pay for, we should do the same with hospitals and clinics.  Private health insurance would still exist, but there would be no need for public insurance.  You just go to the government hospital and they treat you.  No one gets a bill and no claims have to be processed, which would cut down on some administrative expense.

The hard part of that would be drugs and supplies and equipment.  The government would have to figure out some way to get those things at a reduced rate to mitigate the expense of it all, without disrupting the companies who run for-profit businesses producing them.  If you go in the government contract direction you end up with corruption and $500 aspirin instead of $500 hammers, as in the military.

If people weren't so damn greedy maybe something could be accomplished.

[Shoney'sPonyBoy 350]

6 hours ago, 1716AU said:

Republicans have NO issue with out of control spending when they have power. 

I agree with you as well, sir or ma'am.

[Shoney'sPonyBoy 350]

5 hours ago, McLoofus said:

Yeah but incomprehensible defense contracts don't count. Spending is only a problem if it is intended to help lift up the disenfranchised. 

And you, too.  

[bigbird 60,569]

8 hours ago, 1716AU said:

Republicans have NO issue with out of control spending when they have power. 

Absolutely right.