Single-payer healthcare does NOT mean doctors become gov't employees.

[redqueen]

Just thought I'd start this thread in case anyone else was buying that horseshit.

:hi:

[OzarkDem]

1. Just like Medicare for all

choose your own doctor, too.

:hi:

[Gormy Cuss]

2. "Medicare for all" is a great framing.

Medicare isn't some new scary government intrusion. I even know very conservative people who couldn't wait to sign on.

[redqueen]

8. An issue that unites us all?

Not just in the goal, but in the method?

Not many politicians can manage that... especially not on such an issue that so many Americans care so much about.

[CottonBear]

3. We should have Medicare for everyone. Problem solved. n/t

[redqueen]

5. Yup... single-payer...

Dunno how Dems get away with supporting anything else these days.

I guess some people just LIKE giving money away to fatcats!

[Justitia]

4. Right. When someone says "socialism", I ask if the gov't owns our grocery stores yet. -eom

[redqueen]

9. Or the bookstores. n/t

[lazarus]

6. yeah, the framing has been wrong on this

it isn't "socialised medicine", it's "socialised insurance".

[redqueen]

7. Err... well... considering that the 'socialized medicine' lie

has been coming from the right (hasn't it?), I'd think it's not so much a case of the framing being all wrong... since that framing is exactly what they WANT people to see, it's very much what they intended... and so therefore correct, in the sense that they intended for the framing to be misleading.

I'd like to see more from the Dems on this issue. Sadly, I think that's a pretty futile desire.

[lazarus]

10. well, yeah

the right has framed it one way, we need to frame it another way. I get sick of letting these people control our debates with their terminology.

[redqueen]

11. Agree 100%... which is why I posted this

I was shocked to see that 'doctors become government employees' meme being echoed here.

Just like I was shocked to see the 'poor people should just get better jobs, or another job' meme here.



*sigh*

[mdmc]

12. I know many medical providers that accept medicaid

They would be much better off as government employees.:shrug:

[redqueen]

13. So are you saying they're against a single-payer system / medicare for all?

?

[mdmc]

15. No. I am for it. I don't think that we need private providers

They can all work for the government. I don't think that it is bad to work for the government.

Since the government will be paying the medical providers, why not allow the medical providers to work for the government?

Lets say that I am a MSW and I work with people with PTSD. I accept medicaid. Why should I have to work for an organization? Why should medicaid pay an organization, then have the organization pay me? What good is the profit making middle man? Why not work directly for the government?

[redqueen]

17. Well I certainly see no need to prevent it.

But attempting to mandate it might backfire badly.

[mdmc]

19. I don't understand.

The government is paying for the medical service. Why not be a government employee? Why work for a third party that will take part of the profit?

The government pays lots of professionals sick cash. All the medical providers that I know (again, just dealing with medicaid) make a better living in the public sector (more money, more benefits, great union).

Why would we have universal health care, then outsource the actual care to profit taking third parties?

A nurse working in a state run (medicaid funded) group home makes more than a nurse employed at a private (medicaid funded) group home.

As a liberal, I think the world of big government. I think that government can be a positive influence on the lives of its citizenry.

[redqueen]

20. Like I said, I'm definitely not against it.

But IMO it should be a choice. If they make more money in the public sector, then it should naturally shift that direction, since money is most people's primary motivation for doing anything.

[mdmc]

25. Here is how I understand it

Medicaid offers service providers a certain amount of money for a service.
Lets say a MSW can bill medicaid $55.oo for 50 minutes of counseling for a medicaid client.

The MSW can work on their own, or be part of an organization. They get to keep all the money if they are on their own, but if they work for an organization they will get paid whatever the org desires to pay them.

If the MSW was a government employee, they would still get the $55.oo bucks for their services, plus they would get government benefits.

Why should our tax dollars go to third parties? Why not just pay the providers?

I can't find a reason to pay third parties for services that the government can provide at a better rate.

[redqueen]

26. It's like a spoonful of sugar..

it'll help the medicine go down with those in congress who will never stop sucking corporate dick.

Baby steps.

:hi:

[mdmc]

28. God Bless

:)
:hi:

[mdmc]

21. Why NOT prevent private providers from taking medicaid funds?

I can see a rich person private sector under universal health care. Why should taxes pay for private care?

ps- God Bless Dennis Kucinich - he is my boy!

[redqueen]

23. Well, we don't have the government distributing groceries...

and we've been using food stamps for decades... so... I just don't see much of a problem with it.

This country is drenched in worship for capitalism, indididualism, etc... taking away too much at once might very well backfire. In fact I think it would be the PERFECT excuse that 'moderate' dems would use in order to ensure it died a quick death.

[mdmc]

27. Food stamps are meant to enhance the recipient's food budget

not replace it.

Socialized medicine will replace, not supplement private insurance.

There is no benefit to the food consumer to having a government run grocery store.

But to strike a conciliatory note, I guess that private industry should be allowed to compete with the government. I would welcome competition, with the government providing services with fair labor service providers, and the private industry trying to compete on the same terms.

Peace and low stress. I've enjoyed your OP.... :patriot:

[redqueen]

29. I see your point...

It's not quite the same situation.

Wow... we must really be optimistic if we're debating HOW a single-payer system will be implemented, instead of IF. :7


And thanks, I've enjoyed our discussion. :patriot:

[mdmc]

16. The government pays its employees better then the private sector

Where the private sector deals with medicaid.

I forgot that some private providers refuse medicaid and can make huge profits.

What I am saying is that most service providers would be better off working as a government employee then working in the private sector.

[underpants]

14. Good our government is doing too much killing as it is

Oh SNAP did I just say that???

7,000 die annually due to sloppy handwriting
http://www.time.com/time/health/article/0,8599,1578074,00.html

In Hospital Deaths from Medical Errors at 195,000 per Year USA
http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/11856.php
An average of 195,000 people in the USA died due to potentially preventable, in-hospital medical errors in each of the years 2000, 2001 and 2002, according to a new study of 37 million patient records that was released today by HealthGrades, the healthcare quality company.


Doctors Are The Third Leading Cause of Death
in the US, Causing 250,000 Deaths Every Year
http://www.joyfulaging.com/iatrogenic.htm

DEATHS PER YEAR:

· 12,000 - unnecessary surgery 8

· 7,000 - medication errors in hospitals 9

· 20,000 - other errors in hospitals 10

· 80,000 - infections in hospitals 10

· 106,000 - negative effects of drugs 2

[redqueen]

18. Well, when the *bottom line* rules all... shortcuts must be taken.

If those shortcuts result in deaths / injuries... well... at least the shareholders are happy!

:bounce:

[underpants]

22. Exactly

I was thinking about this the other day-I wonder if there really is a relationship of course I don't know why I couldn't find an article either way on this...oh yeah that's right we don't talk about that now do we?

[redqueen]

24. Course not... you know how the liberal media is...

always covering up stories which if exposed, might help improve things for the hoi polloi.

[Vinca]

30. Single-payer, universal healthcare is, essentially, a payment system.

It has nothing to do with doctors or hospitals or other providers. I suppose the government would negotiate prices (the same way insurance companies do), but other than how it's bought and paid for the system would be about the same. Well, actually, that's not true either. People now forking over a small fortune to insurance companies would find they aren't forking over as much for their government coverage because the insurance company profits would be kaput. (Example: last QUARTER earnings for UnitedHealth rose 22% to a whopping $1.2 BILLION.)

[redqueen]

32. Yes, thank you. It only cuts the profit for insurers out of the picture.

And when you consider how much that industry makes... well... it's really the only sane way to begin fixing the mess that is our healthcare system.

[warren pease]

31. From a post yesterday re the nature of single-payer...

Re who works for whom in a single-payer system. Docs, hospitals, clinics and other health care facilities remain intact; they just go non-profit and they're paid by money from the federal govt. attained via a specific tax, such as the social security levy, the money from which remains in a separate fund rather than being absorbed into the general fund (which is how SS used to be until St. Reagan began pilfering from it to make his deficits look less catastrophic).

Medical professionals aren't government employees per se; they're simply paid via the medical fund rather than by private insurers. And, unlike the current system, medical decisions are made solely between doctor and patient.

In contrast to the current way of dispensing medical care, these doctor-patient decisions are not subject to the scrutiny of an army of actuaries whose jobs are to determine the cost/benefits of paying occasional wrongful death settlements due to denial of coverage, or paying for the coverage itself. In a civilized country, holding such a job would be a capital crime. Here's, it's a well-paid, respectable profession.


Single-payer, universal-access is defined by the following attributes:

One nation, one payer.

Everybody in, nobody out.

No exclusion for pre-existing conditions.

No bills from the doctor.

No bills from the hospital.

No deductibles.

No co-pays.

No in network.

No out of network.

No corporate profits.

No threat of bankruptcy from health bills.


In my opinion, to get to single-payer, we need to separate the idea of health care from the idea of health insurance.

Health care is what happens when patients and health care professionals – doctors, nurses, technicians, pathology lab staff, and so on -- interact to successfully diagnose and treat a medical condition or injury.

Health insurance is the protection money you have to pay the middle man to enable this transaction while keeping you out of bankruptcy court. Why would you want to give some parasite who does absolutely nothing to provide health care a single damn penny?

The relationship of health care to insurance is manufactured out of thin air by the US’ obsession with applying market-based, privatized solutions to nationalized, systemic problems. If we're to join the civilized world any time soon, that linkage must disappear in favor of a system that treats health care as a basic human right rather than a privilege to be auctioned off to the highest bidder.

If you want further info, I'm happy to recommend my very own articles on the subject here: http://tinyurl.com/24lxmd


and here: http://tinyurl.com/yqa5pr


and here: http://tinyurl.com/2e2sfy


Also, you might look here: http://www.pnhp.org /

...for a thorough discussion of single-payer from any angle you choose -- cost/benefits, practicality, granular details, political viability, for-profit vs non-profit models, comparisons of the US privatized model vs single-payer systems elsewhere, and the basic moral question of whether health care is a right or a privilege.

Finally, if it's stats you want, here's a link to the World Health Organization's massive study, completed and published in 2000, comparing some 191 countries along various key indicators of how well their health care systems are performing, such as average life span, average disease-free life span, average birth weight, infant mortality rate, access to necessary health care services, cost of those services and so forth: http://tinyurl.com/jdqla

Hint: The US didn't do too well.


Lots more info on single-payer is available. PM me if you want additional links.


wp

[redqueen]

33. Wow... thanks!

:hi:

Wonder if the other candidates are aware of all that... and if so... why are they not championing a single-payer system?