Why Seniors Should Be The Strongest Supporters Of Medicare For All

  • You are viewing Orangepower as a Guest. To start new threads, reply to posts, or participate in polls or contests - you must register. Registration is free and easy. Click Here to register.

CaliforniaCowboy

Federal Marshal
Oct 15, 2003
16,364
2,585
1,743
So Cal
#41
You pick one old article about one disease and claim that means better outcomes? This is why discussing medicine with you is fruitless and a misadventure.
Outcomes are more than one disease. And, even for that disease if you look at data we are among the good but saying “the best” is a reach.
https://www.cdc.gov/cancer/dcpc/research/articles/concord-2.htm

Per dollar spent, we aren’t even that good. As I said, we are getting screwed by a corrupted system. Your incessant googling will not change my mind about my greater than 20 years of experience any more than some antivaxxer who claims “research,” too
actually the article is not that old, I made sure I selected one that was relatively current, your article is 2 years older (2015) than the Forbes article (2017)

Also, I did not pick "one disease", I simply commented to the exact points that were made in the prior posts... which specifically talked about cancer.

I have no idea how much is "spent", or how much is "paid" by citizens through their taxes. Per dollar spent is sort of like ignoring "cost of living". Our treatments are expensive, and our use of technology drives the cost up (per the article), I don't know if that is helpful towards outcome, or whether an old country doctor with age-old practices would be effectively the same, at a lower cost.

I am not defending our system, nor am I disparaging their systems. We can do better in both insurance and in service delivery, and we're always trying to do better on outcome.

I'm not going to sit by and listen to the message board socialists make false claims about the benefits of foreign practices over ours, when their failures are well documented, and it is clear that most of those countries are moving away from that approach to providing and funding medical care.

That's why discussing anything with you is fruitless and a misadventure, because you don't even bother to try and understand what the other posters are saying (you posted a freaking article that was even older for gosh sakes, and claimed I posted an old article).

I'm not trying to change your mind about anything. I agree there is much in the system that is corrupt. I do not agree with the solutions that are proposed by the socialists.
 

OSU79

Federal Marshal
A/V Subscriber
Oct 22, 2009
10,860
10,684
1,743
Back home in God's (Green) Country
#44
So are lots of people on Medicare having to wait many weeks and months for treatment? If not, it means that it works. But do you quite dearly fear Medicare For All would make health care a lot less easier for everybody to get due to lower charges so doctors and hospitals would be overwhelmed and long waiting lists will start?
Yes, I "quite dearly fear" it. After waiting six months for the appointment just to get approved for a reasonably common operation my cousin-in-law walked into his den, told his wife he loved her, collapsed and died in her arms. He was 2 years younger than me. He screwed up - he trusted a system many libs and socialists (not necessarily the same thing) point to as far superior to our own. Even had he made it to his appointment, who knows how long he would have waited for the actual procedure. Had he lived in the US he could have easily afforded to go "out of network" and get the care he needed 6-12 months ago. We saw his wife this past week. Her perception of the Canadian health care system has drastically changed.
 

StillwaterTownie

Federal Marshal
Jun 18, 2010
16,792
2,189
743
Where else but Stillwater
#45
Yes, I "quite dearly fear" it. After waiting six months for the appointment just to get approved for a reasonably common operation my cousin-in-law walked into his den, told his wife he loved her, collapsed and died in her arms. He was 2 years younger than me. He screwed up - he trusted a system many libs and socialists (not necessarily the same thing) point to as far superior to our own. Even had he made it to his appointment, who knows how long he would have waited for the actual procedure. Had he lived in the US he could have easily afforded to go "out of network" and get the care he needed 6-12 months ago. We saw his wife this past week. Her perception of the Canadian health care system has drastically changed.
So what? In this country around 15,000 people died between 2014 and 2017 in states that refused to take advantage of additional Medicaid. Or as a conservative do you and others on here think the number is quite grossly inflated even though it was arrived at by 4 scholars published by the National Bureau of Economic Research?
https://www.esquire.com/news-politi...-americans-died-medicaid-expansion-obamacare/
 

CocoCincinnati

Federal Marshal
Feb 7, 2007
16,802
24,059
1,743
Tulsa, OK
#46
And yet, even with all that nonsense they still have overall health outcomes for half the price. No matter how bad elsewhere is, we are getting screwed.
I have seen exactly nobody suggesting that we don't have problems and don't need reform. But if the rising costs are your worry, then I don't see how it makes sense to combat that by getting more government involved. That's the cause of the problem, not it's solution.
 

CocoCincinnati

Federal Marshal
Feb 7, 2007
16,802
24,059
1,743
Tulsa, OK
#47
I'd like to add again how funny it is to see every single democrat candidate for president arguing that we need health care reform. Remember that the full effect of Obamacare was delayed until after the start of Obama's second term, meaning the ACA has only been in full effect for maybe 6 or 7 years. I can't think of a more damning evaluation of it than the Dems themselves flat out admitting that it has failed and we still need reform. The problem is that these are the same people that gave us Obamacare, "without reading it", why would anyone trust them to fix our problems so soon after their previous costly failed attempt. I mean for pete's sake, the Dem front runner is repeating the exact same lies that were used with the ACA, if you like your plan you can keep you plan. Shame on us if we fall for that crap again.
 

CaliforniaCowboy

Federal Marshal
Oct 15, 2003
16,364
2,585
1,743
So Cal
#48
Still, though, the indigent aren't those paying for medical care, because they have little to no money.
are you completely daft? THAT IS WHY I'M COMPLAINING ABOUT YOUR CRAP STATEMENTS!

I already pay for me, I already pay for the indigent, I don't want to pay for "medicare for all".

That is a bridge too far.

I'll help the indigent, the disabled and the elderly... but get it straight - it is ME helping, and IT IS NOT FREE.

I'm paying. Nothing is free. Somebody had to pay for it.
 

CaliforniaCowboy

Federal Marshal
Oct 15, 2003
16,364
2,585
1,743
So Cal
#49
I have seen exactly nobody suggesting that we don't have problems and don't need reform. But if the rising costs are your worry, then I don't see how it makes sense to combat that by getting more government involved. That's the cause of the problem, not it's solution.
he worries so much about the rising costs that he flat out said let the Dr's charge what they want, and make an arbitrator decide who pays and who get money.

The "middle man" makes too much, but not the Providers, apparently.

They whole thing needs re-worked.
 

steross

Bookface/Instagran legend
A/V Subscriber
Mar 31, 2004
26,679
32,062
1,743
oklahoma city
#51
.
I have seen exactly nobody suggesting that we don't have problems and don't need reform. But if the rising costs are your worry, then I don't see how it makes sense to combat that by getting more government involved. That's the cause of the problem, not it's solution.
Every other country on earth with a modern healthcare system has the government more involved than we do. And yet, every single one of them have lower costs than we do. What is the evidence that the problem is government?

If the best way to function a modern system to decrease costs is to let the market do it why is that not occurring anywhere, ever? How can you be so sure of something that has never happened?
 

steross

Bookface/Instagran legend
A/V Subscriber
Mar 31, 2004
26,679
32,062
1,743
oklahoma city
#52
he worries so much about the rising costs that he flat out said let the Dr's charge what they want, and make an arbitrator decide who pays and who get money.

The "middle man" makes too much, but not the Providers, apparently.

They whole thing needs re-worked.
You are trolling me by falsifying what I said and calling it “my worries” which you are the last person on earth with any knowledge of. I would appreciate if you stopped replying to my posts or badgering me in this thread or on this subject. I respected your request, we will see if you are man enough to do the same.
 

CaliforniaCowboy

Federal Marshal
Oct 15, 2003
16,364
2,585
1,743
So Cal
#53
You are trolling me by falsifying what I said and calling it “my worries” which you are the last person on earth with any knowledge of. I would appreciate if you stopped replying to my posts or badgering me in this thread or on this subject. I respected your request, we will see if you are man enough to do the same.
nope sorry, you tried that already.... I get it... you set the boundaries or else... ta da... I'm not man enough... very odd how that only works one way like that

now stop with the falsities.
 

CaliforniaCowboy

Federal Marshal
Oct 15, 2003
16,364
2,585
1,743
So Cal
#54
.

Every other country on earth with a modern healthcare system has the government more involved than we do. And yet, every single one of them have lower costs than we do. What is the evidence that the problem is government?

If the best way to function a modern system to decrease costs is to let the market do it why is that not occurring anywhere, ever? How can you be so sure of something that has never happened?
"higher costs" could be the result of many factors, like I already said (cost of living). Doctors in Singapore charge less than Doctors at Johns Hopkins... guess what, now the US spends more on healthcare. There you have it.

Guess what, US patients often get more procedures than other countries (because they can), and low and behold our total healthcare costs are now higher (because we get more).

Our hospital stays are shorter than most countries (but US hospitals are expensive).

How do healthcare prices and use in the U.S. compare to other countries?
By Rabah Kamal and Cynthia Cox Kaiser Family Foundation

https://www.healthsystemtracker.org...he-u-s-compare-to-other-countries/#item-start


Do you have some other information that demonstrates that US costs are in fact higher - or is it really just how the math is done?
 

ksupoke

We don't need no, thot kuntrol
A/V Subscriber
Feb 16, 2011
12,125
16,441
743
dark sarcasm in the classroom
#55
Just my guess but I think that too many times we conflate healthcare and health costs.
Our healthcare is just fine, best in the world, our health costs are expensive, most expensive in the world in terms of price, to compare them to other countries is virtually impossible because we cannot know for sure how costs (including what is included in their calculation) the other part that makes it somewhat disingenuous to make the comparison is that we also cannot know with any certainty what portion of the taxes or other fees captured by a government are actually part of the healthcare costs but put in a different bucket, it's similar to the discussion on military spending, do I think we spend too much, most likely, can you compare it on an even scale with say, China, nope not the same.

Gvt is the principal reason our health costs are out of control (and yes they are out of control) and that's a direct result of the outcropping of new government authority and all that came about as a result of the new deal, if you don't keep the person in power in check, they are never going to keep themselves in check, further involvement will simply keep us on that same trajectory. Can they manipulate it to make it look better, sure, just like they can cancel all the outstanding student debt and make those who accepted the liability feel better, except that it still gets paid it just moves it to a different pocket. Interestingly enough, those whose debt is cancelled don't understand that once they start getting a paycheck from a 'job' that they now will repay that debt with a much higher interest rate and somehow feel better about it.
 
Last edited:

CaliforniaCowboy

Federal Marshal
Oct 15, 2003
16,364
2,585
1,743
So Cal
#56
Gvt is the principal reason our health costs are out of control (and yes they are out of control) and that's a direct result of the outcropping of new government authority and all that came about as a result of the new deal, if you don't keep the person in power in check, they are never going to keep themselves in check, further involvement will simply keep us on that same trajectory, can they manipulate it to make it look better, sure, just like they can cancel all the outstanding student debt and make those who accepted the liability feel better, except that still gets paid it just moves it to a different pocket, interestingly enough those whose debt is cancelled don't understand that once they start getting a paycheck from a 'job' that they now will repay that debt with a much higher interest rate and somehow feel better about it.
Government also mandates a whole lot of other expense onto the industry from certifications to processes and procedures, not to mention forcing ERs to take anybody even if they can't pay (somebody has to pay for that, and the cost goes someplace for that government mandate), and government interference in the free market by providing Medicare that competes directly with free market coverage's and sets "benchmarks" for what products and services are "worth" - rather than letting the free market determine that.

It's overly apparent that the government is way too involved in it, and had and is directly impacting the costs and availability.
 

steross

Bookface/Instagran legend
A/V Subscriber
Mar 31, 2004
26,679
32,062
1,743
oklahoma city
#57
nope sorry, you tried that already.... I get it... you set the boundaries or else... ta da... I'm not man enough... very odd how that only works one way like that

now stop with the falsities.
Right... that was me that "tried that already." :lol::lol: You are so clueless that I honestly do feel like a schoolyard bully messing with you. I will stop.
ya just can't quit badgering me.

I asked you to leave me alone, but you just won't quit trolling.

please stop with your personal attacks. This is the 2nd direct request.

I have no interest in what you think of me. Please stick to the subject matter.

I simply will not tolerate you continuing to badger me and then try to bully me into believing that you're a victim and everything is my fault.
 

steross

Bookface/Instagran legend
A/V Subscriber
Mar 31, 2004
26,679
32,062
1,743
oklahoma city
#58
Just my guess but I think that too many times we conflate healthcare and health costs.
Our healthcare is just fine, best in the world, our health costs are expensive, most expensive in the world in terms of price, to compare them to other countries is virtually impossible because we cannot know for sure how costs (including what is included in their calculation) the other part that makes it somewhat disingenuous to make the comparison is that we also cannot know with any certainty what portion of the taxes or other fees captured by a government are actually part of the healthcare costs but put in a different bucket, it's similar to the discussion on military spending, do I think we spend too much, most likely, can you compare it on an even scale with say, China, nope not the same.

Gvt is the principal reason our health costs are out of control (and yes they are out of control) and that's a direct result of the outcropping of new government authority and all that came about as a result of the new deal, if you don't keep the person in power in check, they are never going to keep themselves in check, further involvement will simply keep us on that same trajectory, can they manipulate it to make it look better, sure, just like they can cancel all the outstanding student debt and make those who accepted the liability feel better, except that still gets paid it just moves it to a different pocket, interestingly enough those whose debt is cancelled don't understand that once they start getting a paycheck from a 'job' that they now will repay that debt with a much higher interest rate and somehow feel better about it.
I don't disagree with you philosophically but am still not sure it is correct. If there really was this semi-nirvana of good healthcare for all citizens at a reasonable cost if the government just got out of the way it seems unlike that no country on earth would figure that out.

I think our healthcare is best in the world at certain things. And, it falls horrendously behind in others.
 

CaliforniaCowboy

Federal Marshal
Oct 15, 2003
16,364
2,585
1,743
So Cal
#59
Right... that was me that "tried that already." :lol::lol: You are so clueless that I honestly do feel like a schoolyard bully messing with you. I will stop.
lol - yep that's what I said... and you just can't do it, can you..... it's always because if I don't, then "I'm not a man" or some other attack.

you feel like a bully, because you are.
 

SLVRBK

Johnny 8ball's PR Manager
Staff
A/V Subscriber
Oct 16, 2003
14,231
5,201
1,743
Katy, TX
#60
This is from an article talking about shortage of Primary Practice doctors but I thought these excerpts highlight some of the things @steross has mentioned: https://khn.org/news/american-medical-students-less-likely-to-choose-to-become-primary-care-doctors/
_________________________________________________________

The Association of American Medical Colleges predicts a shortage of between 21,100 and 55,200 primary care physicians by 2032. More doctors will be needed in the coming years to care for aging baby boomers, many of whom have multiple chronic conditions. The obesity rate is also increasing, which portends more people with chronic health problems.

Studies have shown that states with a higher ratio of primary care physicians have better health and lower rates of mortality. Patients who regularly see a primary care physician also have lower health costs than those without one.
_________________________________________________________

Dr. Eric Hsieh, the internal medicine residency program director at the University of Southern California’s Keck School of Medicine, said another deterrent is the amount of time primary care doctors spend filling out patients’ electronic medical records.

“I don’t think people realize how involved electronic medical records are,” said Hsieh. “You have to synthesize everything and coordinate all of the care. And something that I see with the residents in our program is that the time spent on electronic medical records rather than caring for patients frustrates them.”

The Medscape survey confirms this. Internists appear to be more burdened with paperwork than other specialties, and 80% of internists report spending 10 or more hours a week on administrative tasks.
________________________________________________________
Elsa Pearson, a health policy analyst at Boston University, said one way to keep and attract primary care doctors might be to shift some tasks to health care providers who aren’t doctors, such as nurse practitioners or physician assistants.


“The primary care that they provide compared to a physician is just as effective,” said Pearson. They wouldn’t replace physicians but could help lift the burden and free up doctors for more complicated care issues.


Pearson said more medical scribes, individuals who take notes for doctors while they are seeing patients, could also help to ease the doctors’ burden of electronic health record documentation.