Bill Moyers on the "Single Payer" plan for health care on PBS
By John Amato Sunday Jun 07, 2009 8:00am
Bill Moyers had an excellent panel discussion on the only true road to universal health care for our country. It's called: Single Payer Health Insurance.
Dr. David Himmelstein and Dr. Sidney Wolfe give a very easy explanation of what Single Payer health care means and also take us down memory lane when the fight first started. It's hard to understand President Obama on this issue. He has the bully pulpit and he has the votes for the most part since it won't take 60 votes to pass it, so why is he not in favor of single payer? Yes, I know, it will be tough to pass, but covering Americans with this plan would also save jobs, decrease personal bankruptcies incredibly and save Corporations billions of dollars on health care costs. Talk about a real stimulus. Anyway, back to Moyers.
Health care reform is coming. Both Congress and President Obama have made it a top priority, and many expect a bill by the fall. Now comes the tricky part — designing and funding a plan. President Obama has outlined broad goals, several competing plans have been introduced in the Congress, and the Republican party recently introduced its own plan.
But Dr. David Himmelstein and Dr. Sidney Wolfe tell Bill Moyers on the JOURNAL that President Obama isn't considering a popular plan — single-payer. In a recent town-hall meeting in New Mexico, President Obama said switching to single-payer would be too disruptive.The term "single-payer" generally means a system in which rather than having private, for-profit insurance companies, the government runs one large non-profit insurance organization. That organization pays all the doctor, drug and hospital bills — it is the "single-payer" of all medical bills. In most single-payer plans, every American would be enrolled and would pay into the fund through taxes...read on
It's an excellent video. It looks like they are trying to force us with a "public option" plan instead of real reform of health care. I'm still sorting out a lot of information on the health care problem, but some of us are working on an action soon.
Howie Klein has a rundown of all the money that the people who are blocking real reform in health care have received from the health care industry.
Arlen Specter (R-D- PA- $4,026,933)
Max Baucus (DLC- MT- $2,833,731)
Mitch McConnell (R-KY- $2,758,468)And when you just go right to Big Insurance, the non-presidential candidates who got the biggest legalized bribes were the 7 senators who have been tasked with the job of killing single-payer:
Ben Nelson (DLC-NE- $1,196,799)
Max Baucus (DLC- MT- $1,184,113)
Joe Lieberman (DLC- CT- $1,036,302)
Arlen Specter (R-D- PA- $1,035,530)
Chuck Schumer (D-NY- $981,400)
Mitch McConnell (R-KY- $929,207)
Chuck Grassley (R-IA- $884,724)
We will be addressing the members of Congress very soon. Thank God for Bernie Sanders. Here's something positive at least.
Right now Sanders is pushing for an incubator program (5 states with single payer) to test it out and show how it works. The Progressive Caucus in the House is still insisting-- some would say tilting-- for a robust national plan that will lead to single payer.
Eighty liberal lawmakers, in a letter sent to House Democratic leaders Friday, forcefully demanded a “robust and affordable” new government-run health insurance plan be part of health care reform.
That would be the Progressive Caucus teaming up with the Congressional Black Caucus and the Congressional Hispanic Caucus trying to counterbalance the Blue Dogs who oppose a workable public option (although several moderate Blue Dogs freaked out and disassociated themselves from the GOP talking points that were touted as the Blue Dog position). Here's the statement from the Progressive Caucus:...read on
Login or Register to post comments.
Thank GOODNESS for Bernie Sanders!
I think it would be best to leave 'god' out of the discussion.
Single payer is the only way forward.
their Giant Campuses and move into strip mall shops to make medical treatments affordable to people?
Unfortunately, I think Bernie Sanders is the only senator in favor of a single-payer health plan. The *ONLY* one.
I also want to thank John for placing a "DLC" next to the names of the "Democrats" on this list, since it shows who they're really working for. (Shouldn't Charles Schumer also get the dreaded "DLC" seal of bad-faithkeeping?)
A true Progressive Liberal, who truely cares, and is not skeered or unwilling to do the right thing for the American people!....for whatever reason Obama is NOT willing to do so!
My eyes are playing tricks on me again; I thought it said,"Bill Moyers on the Single Prayer' plan for health care on PBS.
Shit--the people--walks...
I'll eat a hat if anything even remotely resembling "single-payer" health-care emerges from Congress ANY TIME before the Rapture...
There my eyes go again; I thought you said, "I'll eat a hat if anything even remotely resembling "single-payer" health-care emerges from Congress ANY TIME before the Rupture..."
ruptures are definitely not covered.
The rupture is more like it…
Rupture as in the end of the age of oil when civilization, as some were so fond to call it, will fall into the mud of global warming.
As far as the hat goes, we can make it a dinner for two.
After we address financial mayhem, dirty dealings of bankers and politicians, scams without count, massive historical frauds, ubiquitous corporate malfeasance.
In the meantime just focus on the needs of ones stomach, sex organs and position in the pecking order.
Would a plan mean we'd still have to pay huge deductables? Will my family and I have to pay $400 every month just to have a minimum of coverage? Would they continue to tell us what doctors to see?
If one of us should get a life-threatening illness, would some pencil-pusher decide not to pay for the expensive procedure we'd need to save our lives?
It's just confusing and I don't know what reform will look like.
There are two groups, those who serve the psychopaths and those who do not. The first group is the larger one.
You are covered 100% for everything!
Single payer explained:
http://www.pnhp.org/facts/what_is_single_paye...
Thank you! I'll read this tonight when I get home!
Medicare and it would save billions. It would turn the real economy around by putting the shareholder dividends, insurance advertising dollars and CEO pay back in the bank accounts of average Americans.
Read this.
http://www.consortiumnews.com/2009/060509.html
You would pay higher taxes as part of the progressive tax code. You would go to the doctors in your area and just as in the UK, Canada, France et al, you and/or your family would get the treatment they require. The noise about a bureaucrat deciding your health care is actually true today but it's not a factor in or part of single payer.
The doctors with Bill Moyers mentioned it but as an anecdote, the endocrinologist I see has 2 partners, one of whom is just establishing his practice and the 3 of them have 14 people who handle the administration. Her experience is not atypical.
That list of paid off Senators is very telling. These crooks are keeping single payer health care away from the discussions and ignoring their constituents. It's left to a bunch of criminals deciding how best to spin the facts and continue business as usual.
Insurance Korporations are so mercilessly greedy that they won't be satisfied until there is absolutely no one left that can actually afford health ins.
As far as competition bringing the prices down, How's that been workin' for us in the past 30 years?
It's called collusion, They all work together and all keep the prices right where they want them!
I have said this before..... and it bears repeating.
For profit health care is by definition a conflict of interest.
Paid off Senators protecting this behavior is also a conflict of interest and may possibly be criminal. This needs to be aggressively investigated and prosecuted.
Korporations are required to make a profit .......by law!
This causes a serious conflict of interest in managing health care.
People who are not doctors and in most cases have no medical training whatsoever make decisions about your health care and coverages.
Those decisions are supposedly made about your health issues yet they are primarily focused on whether or not it is profitable for the korporation.
The patients health ends up being a secondary priority and it has cost many people their lives.
Don't believe the lies being told to you by our own government officials that "America has the best health care in the world". It's all Bullsh**. Most of the people telling you this are owned by the pharmaceutical and insurance industry lobbyists
According to the World health organization (WHO), America ranks 37th in the world for health care. Just behind Costa Rica and just ahead of Cuba. We are behind countries that we consider to be third world!
See the rankings here:
http://www.photius.com/rankings/healthranks.html
Someone please explain to me how we arrive at the conclusion that we have the best health care in the world. Even if we did have the best health care in the world, What good is it when nobody can can afford access to it?
For profit health care should be illegal as it is in many other civilized nations around the world! In those countries insurance company's are only allowed to sell supplemental insurance.
In those countries all your medical needs are covered 100%.
Letting any Insurance companies make the rules will result in the same outcome............Fraud, Collusion, price fixing and continued fleecing of their customers.
Demand single payer health care now! and take the for profit motive out of health care!
on matters where they have a financial conflict of interest. Guess that's considered quaint, like the Geneva Conventions.
TakeOurCountryBack writes, "People who are not doctors and in most cases have no medical training whatsoever make decisions about your health care and coverages."
I've known this for years, of course, but it just now occurred to me: Isn't this practicing medicine without a license?
what would happen to the huge insurance industry, all it's employees, and all the businesses that serve them? Isn't this a reasonable concern? What about all the folks who like their current plan, and would be unlikely to support single payer, or politicians who push for it?
It seems to me that what Obama is doing is acknowledging the reality that, given the current state of affairs and politics, it will be impossible to get to single payer this year. Even many democrats who would support adding a public option would not go for single payer. So if we are to get reform this year, the best we can hope for is a robust public option. Don't get me wrong: I would love to see a single payer plan for the U.S. But Obama knows, and progressives should acknowledge, that going for single payer now would fail, and we might well be looking at another long period of inaction.
Isn't it just possible that, once a robust and efficient public option is in place and people can see it working, we would then have a realistic chance of moving towards single payer?
is costing more jobs than what insurance companies would lose. If GM had single payer they wouldn't be facing bankruptcy.
Like medicare it will need to be administrated and those people could slide right in to those jobs.
Think about this, How many people die each year because of Insurance companies denying coverages because it's not profitable for them? and how many more die each year because they can't afford the extortion of health insurance rates?
As an example: Over 500,000 people a year die of cancer. The FDA and the cancer industry aggressively persecute alternative treatments for cancer. Some of these treatments have been found to be extremely effective but the Cancer industry which includes the Big Pharmaceutical companies can't patent those natural remedy's so they try to eliminate them to ensure their continued profits.
What will happen to all those people who work in the cancer industry if and we find out that cancer can actually be treated and cured using those treatments?
What do we want more? Health coverage for all or continued massive profits for the health care insurance companies? A real cure for cancer or the continuation of the same failed treatments and continued profits for the cancer industry?
It's a no brainer for me!
the nail on the head.
This is mostly about getting the public a seat at the table. Once our foot is in the healthcare door, we're in for good.
The idea that anybody likes their plan, or has any feelings about it, is a health insurance industry fiction.
People like getting high quality affordable health care, and single payer would ensure that you continue to get that if you are getting it now.
But if you really specifically like getting your care on the backs of the uninsured and other victims of the health insurance industry (in other words, under your current plan) then you are a sociopath, and single payer will end that little pleasure of yours. But that's not a pleasure you or anyone has a right to.
What would happen to all those middle class jobs?
There would be disruption, but they are ultimately a drag on our economy, engaged in no productive activity. The money our economy saves not sustaining those parasitic unproductive paper pushing insurance jobs will be available to invest in actual productive activities that will create jobs and enhance rather than detract from our economic well being.
"Going for single payer now" brings the only viable solution closer, even if we lose this time. Either they are willing to take down the insurance industry or they are not ... and clearly they are not. That means we get a non viable interim solution and will revisit this in 10 years when the insurance industry has assured its slow and certain failure, and we will still be living with the most expensive and most unjust system in the industrialized world.
Don't imagine that even the "competing public plan" option is a viable bandaid. It will become a dumping ground for high cost cases, and used to "prove" that single payer is not viable. The terms on which a successful outcome that does not attack the health insurance industry itself can be won... are terms that redefine "lose" as "win." If the health insurance industry is onboard, then "success" is "failure", and nothing will change.
This is the corruption of capitalism.... capital, not the rational self interest of the people, controls the outcome, one dollar one vote, instead of one person one vote.... all sustained by the myth that one day it will all "trickle down".
Would single-payer be good. Sure, but not gonna happen. The best we can hope for is a public option.
Remember those days? Oh we were free then I forgot.
This was before Global (ism) Corporations took over.
Obama's got the presidency and both houses......whatcha waiting for obama!?....are you skeered?! Dont be a biatch to the INS. company, and DON'T make me ONE!!!!
TOTAL Failure as prez. w/out SINGLE PAYER....period.
On health care and Iraq/Afghanistan, no change. His failure is part of failure of Congress, deeply penetrated by military industrial and health care industrial interests.
It's a deeply tangled structural mess...
LOBBYING with $$$ = BRIBERY! Period!
These politicians are taking "payolla" plain and simple. Is there anyone out there with a law degree who can sue these bastards?
Really, something has got to be done, or these fucktard politicians will sell us all into corporate slavery - and on our dime no less.
I can remember a time in America before corporate fascism was brought to us by the GOP and their blue dog cousins. Man I miss the country I was brought up in.
Sorry, I don't see the difference......
Maybe Obama's problem is the fact that he has all of the DLC Clinton flunkies as advisors, and these people are terrified of the health care debate because of what happened to Hillary in 1993.
Otherwise, I see no logical reason for their tempid approach other than they just don't give a shit about the american people - like the GOP.
Yes, he is staffed to the gills with DLC pinhead types. I think they do what they do because they've been purchased by the industries that have been ripping off this country for decades. They don't work for us, they work for the corporations that line their pockets for them and promise even greater rewards when they leave office.
how dare they sacrifice the future of our country and its people, so they can enjoy the fruits of bribery and corruption.
They can sacrifice us because they are politicians and lie for living. If they don't take the bribes to get rich then what's the point of going into politics. I wish people would wake up already and realize that we are swimming without a paddle and the politicians be they democrat or republican are not here to help you. They do as they are told and get rich/powerful off of it and that's that. People wonder why i'd sooner trust a pimp with my life before i trust a politician. At least with the pimp i know what i'm getting from the get go!!!!
Single Payer means we pay nothing, and we choose who we want as a doctor.WE ALREADY PAY THE COSTS THAT WOULD COVER EVERY MAN AND CHILD, the money is going to the prick CEO's and their rich drug addict moron children.
I wish that Kucinich would've been supported here and on TV. If that guy was in office right now, OH wow, heads would be rolling, Cheney, Bush, Rumsfeld, Rove would be on trial. No bail-outs given to major bureaucratic insurance company's. Fisa wouldn't have a retroactive law protecting Billion dollar law breaking communication company's. The war would be over, Oh man.
What was wrong with Kucinich again????????????????????????????
http://healthcare.kucinich.us/
Great info!^^
Toss out the fake......
Democrats are elitists and won't vote for anyone who doesn't look like a Kennedy.
Obama looks like a Kennedy?
He must be the black-sheep of the family.
Obama is a young, attractive male with an Ivy League background, obviously far closer to a Kennedy than Kucinich. During the primary, Democratic commentators were saying Kucinich looked like a gnome, implying of course that his physical appearance alone made him unqualified to be President.
Actually during the campaign I was joking that Obama looked like he was taking his fashion tips from the Kennedy's and Rob Petrie. I remember when they compared Ross Perot to a gnome.
You're right of course about the Ivy-League background, but when was the last time we had a president who didn't have an Ivy League background? I'm not sure about ray gunn and nixon.
gramm said something, when he withdrew from a republican primary, that he wasn't pretty enough, but that didn't get my sympathy.
We really are not as great as we think we are when most of the civilized world provides healthcare for its citizens but the system here won't allow it. The ruling class here keeps 99% of the average joes from being healthy, outrageous! Brutal, but what do you expect from a country that excuses torture and refuses to correct war crimes. Time to start looking at those social democracies in Europe to spend the rest of my days.
http://www.reuters.com/article/newsOne/idUSTR...
Look 75% of the 60% bankruptcies due to medical bill debt had healthCare insurance. this debt is SHIFTED
to tax payers/paying pool of those with healthCare insurance. as said in this piece the healthCare insurance industry 'thrive on fragmentation'. they write the rules as they go along. consequences for their misdeeds are of NO concern so therefore it's just business as usual. healthCare insurers are just part of the culture we have allowed/pushed onto us. specifically gamemanship,bait&switch,buyer beware and the UNfair advantage. it's common for people to lose their healthCare insurance simply because these people
are NOT profitable. healthCare contracts are like credit card contracts NO one can interpret. CHINA is going to a universal healthCare system. i'm not sure why this isn't getting any media. CHINA will clearly have another advantage in the global economy.
We're all on the same page when we support single payer, meaning we should self-insure on a national basis, just like most large corporations are self-insured.
But, I don't think we have 60 votes, because so many Democrats, along with Republicans are corporate owned.
To determine whether single payer is viable in the current political environment, we have to decide what the state of the government is currently, namely:
1.) Is the government a government of the people, by the people, and for the people?
... or
2.) Is the government a government of the corporation, by the corporation, and for the corporation?
I've often maintained that the answer is #2. I think that the proponents of the Demoplan have concluded likewise.
At least, Obama has now come out to support a public option as part of health care reform, much as is described in the Demoplan. So, when previously, it was looking like we would get nothing, we might be getting "something" with the Demoplan and Obama's support now for the public option. If and when we get the Demoplan, that doesn't mean we need stop trying for single-payer.
Obama needs to think about how "disruptive" for-profit health insurance plans are for Americans instead of thinking about how disruptive a switch to a single-payer plan would be for the insurance companies.
If the for-profit plans are so great and affordable, it makes sense to have a period of time when people can choose government health care coverage or a private plan. Maybe for a year or two. That would alleviate the "disruptive" aspect for private health care insurance companies by giving them some time to offer coverage that is more reasonable.
Then if the government plan works better than private plans, the Obama administration will have what's needed to convert all health coverage to single-payer, maybe with an option for private coverage for some things like non-critical elective surgeries.
The Demoplan adds a public option. It does not subtract the private options available today. Those who oppose it want to take decision making and a right to choose from you and me, and leave that decision making to corporations.
to put these shills who are working to kill single-payer healthcare out of a job. They are so transparently corrupt, have so obviously been bribed, are so clearly owned lock, stock and barrel that it boggles the mind. I am astonished that they sit in positions of trust, when they belong in prison for accepting bribes.
Max Baucus saying it isn't on the table because it is impossible to pass? Is he kidding? He and his fellow criminals are the only ones making it impossible to pass. Anybody who has accepted money from the bribers, from Obama down to the lowest ranking Congress critter need to pause and think about what they are doing. They screw the American people this time around, we;'ll just have to kick their asses out of office and replace them with people of integrity. It is inevitable that we will eventually have a single-payer system. It can happen with or without the current crop of politicians.
It's virtually impossible to get rid of powerful incumbents like Baucus in a primary. The only thing you can do is put a Republican in office, and then try and replace the Republican the next time around. Unfortunately, most Democrats and progressives refuse to think two steps ahead.
THEY ARE ALL THE SAME!!!
I can't believe I voted for a corporate stooge!
Yup! You betcha! Obama is a total failure!
I'm wondering about and think I'm going to investigate what it takes for a single citizen to file a complaint with the Justice Department. These guys are clearly on the take, quid pro quo-wise. they should be put in prison for their corruption.
The Ds and Rs know that they can collaborate and play the stooge sheeple as fools and not ever rock the boat of the elite, the rich and the connected. They are an elitist club and each throw us common folk a tiny bone every now and then.
As George Carlin said "who really controls America and why we are so dumb" http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hYIC0eZYEtI BTW the greedy promoters of Carlin do him a huge disservice by pulling down his many youtube videos that say it all such as "It's a big club and you ain't in it"
We need a third Party that looks out for Americans and America would be far better for it.
The health insurance companies have bought off both parties. Health insurance companies provide nothing worthwhile except to their overpaid CEOs by denying benefits when those who need coverage are least able to fight it. I'm for denying coverage to the health insurance companies. Give us single payer.
single-payer will be impossible to pass. The average American is ignorant about the amount of money currently being spent on healthcare, and once the GOP/Corporate lackeys start their disinformation campaign in earnest, they'll have all the dumbasses spewing dollar costs as if we were trying to invent healthcare from scratch.
Think about the numbers of people who speak as if Obama invented the deficit/national debt. These people are clueless, and they are the 'swing votes' that will kill single payer and go to the voting booths to 'punish' those evil Dems for trying to 'steals all our moneys'.
Americans are a stupid, easily scared mob, and the 'Pubs and the corporations are masters at manipulating them. Hell, they've got 3 decades of experience.
“The average American is ignorant about the amount of money currently being spent on healthcare...”
Why is that? It's because the corporate media isn't informing them of the large disparity in costs between our approach (16% of GDP) versus costs in Europe, Canada, and Japan (11% of GDP). A cost benchmark of 11% of GDP like other countries do is off the table.
The underlying diseases is a corporate media disinformation campaign and a corporate owned and operated government. Make no mistake - we have the same corporate media that misled the nation into supporting the war in Iraq.
Unlike the early 1990s, when Hillary tried to bring health care reform, we now have the internet. But, it is not lost on corporations that if they can control what people see and hear, then they'll control what people think and say.
I think ending net neutrality will be their attempt to stuff the genie back in the bottle.
in addition to that people in this country have been living for today and only today. they don't think it's going to happen to them(health crisis). the culture is about chance and increased risk taking. as the banks found out there is risk by taking too much risk. i may not be clear here but the insurance industry is part of this take advantage of the uninformed. profit before patient, take as much as you can at all cost mentality. the system is 'fragmented',complex and complicated by design so to delay/deny PAYment. they will never stop this model because it's effective for profit. this is why reform needs to happen NOW. some want to wait but like the ceo of GOOGLE said this morning we can't wait cost will only continue to rise and this will negatively effect doing business in this country. this is also a economic necessity.
Paul writes, "Max Baucus saying it isn't on the table because it is impossible to pass? Is he kidding?"
No, but he's SUCH a liar -- look at his face and eyes as he says it. It is astonishing and mind-boggling that these people are not in prison.
"It's hard to understand President Obama on this issue. He has the bully pulpit and he has the votes for the most part since it won't take 60 votes to pass it, so why is he not in favor of single payer?"
For the answer, look at the sources of his financial support during the campaign.
...see above....
he can count heads in the congress/senate?
He's not a King, he still has to deal with a gutless Legislative branch and a moronic, easily frightened public.
We only got support for the public option this week from Obama, as far as I know. And spending money to cover the uninsured, driving up the deficits is unsustainable.
The fact is, copying a health care approach used abroad from Europe, Canada, or Japan is the only fiscally conservative approach. It's the only way to cover everyone without further outlays, assuming of course, that the country's insurance expenses are redirected towards national self-insurance.
Ben Bernanke has warned that the deficits will threaten the recovery, so Obama may be caught between a rock and a hard place. Of course, he has to deal with a Congress, many of which would prefer that many Americans go without insurance, and those who have it get price-gouged. So, we may wind up with nothing. Right now, my thinking is to rally around the Demoplan with its public option.
The "public option" is a JOKE!
"Public Option" has all the transparency and public benefits of another Wall Street Bailout. "Public Option" is a dumping ground for the sick and elderly - a mechanism to increase insurance mafia profits while taxpayers cover the expensive patients. "Public Option" adds to the complexity and cost of the current insanely expensive and hopelessly inadequate system while providing no benefits expect to insurance mafia CEOs.
"Public Option" would be so profitable that the insurance mafia's minions have launched an $82 million astroturf campaign to mislead us into thinking that the insurance mafia opposes "Public Option" and that therefore "Public Option" must somehow be good for us.
SINGLE PAYER IS THE ONLY HEALTHY SOLUTION.
I think part of the reform is that insurance companies have to insure people with pre-existing conditions. The "public option" could be used by small businesses to get the same "self insured" costs available to large businesses.
The public option was described by Krugman back in 2007 and described as the Demoplan.
The devil is in the details, and it remains to be seen whether the "public option" is merely a dumping ground for chronically ill patients. Of course, if you see something in the legislation that indicates that is the purpose of the public option, I would be very much interested.
I think the current stage of the health care reform is that it's still in committee. I'm not aware of a draft yet.
But certainly, question number 1 about any public option would have to be the point you raise, namely:
"How will the public option be designed so that it isn't merely a dumping ground for chronically ill patients, and a windfall mechanism for insurance corporations?"
We'll see what the answer is.
I don't think he can depend on 60 votes, what with the ConservaDems...
If you have not watched or listened to this program (5-22-09) you should, and you should encourage everyone that you know to watch/listen:
http://www-tc.pbs.org/moyers/rss/media/donnas...
http://www-tc.pbs.org/moyers/rss/media/himmel...
You can listen for free also on podcast.....take time to watch and act.....please.
What's an .m4v file? I'm running IE7 on Vista, and it says "unknown file type."
I have no idea what an .m4v file is but you can access it on pbs.org
If Obama is going to nationalize corporations, insurance companies and banks, how about nationalizing health care as well?
And while he's at it, give PBS proper funding and autonomy like the BBC in England, CBC in Canada, ABC in Australia, Deutsche-Welle in Germany, etc.? The US could sure as hell use a news source that is untouched by, and unanswerable to, any political party or government.
I worry about the US not adopting a single payer system. I have healthcare coverage for my family through my employer and I also participated in my company's flex spending plan this year. I opted to withhold $2000 for healthcare expenses through said flex plan. Aside from a little one who needed 4 stitches, we've all been relatively healthy...couple of colds here...couple of sinus infections there....and we burned through that 2 grand by the middle of May! Since then, we've shelled out an additional $130 in healthcare costs.....and this is all WITH insurance coverage! We need single payer....NOW!
i am more convinced everyday, and now listening to these two esteemed doctors, that we will have to have the country go bankrupt before we fix this, and the healthcare bill is going to take down the treasury, not any stimulis at this point....
as winston churchill said, "america always does the right thing, after they try everything else"....
Listen again to what the 2 doctors are saying about costs. Take Medicare for example. Presently, the government takes in about 18.5% of GDP in taxes; by 2042, Medicare costs alone will exceed 15% and by 2050 would take the entire government revenue as a % of GDP.
The cost projections are simply unsustainable.
Remember, too, although you'll never hear about it on cable, network or Fox TV nor read it in the newspapers or magazines: the UK (just as an example) gets roughly similar health outcomes as the US, has a longer life expectancy and pays 40% per capita of what the US pays. 40%!!!!!
Single payer is the only way to contain costs in the long run and if we don't start soon, health care costs will bankrupt the country.
As I recall, not long ago we used to have a tradition in this country where people who had dark skins worked for no pay on large agricultural enterprises to build the fortunes of influential white men. Mr. President, where would you be now if someone hadn't decided that that was a bad tradition to continue?
You're a smart man, Mr. Obama, but that doesn't make the rest of us stupid.
Over the past few months, it has been refreshing to learn just how right many of us in the military really were when we said: "A Republican Administration talks nice about us, and a Democratic Administration keeps off food stamps."
Now that the Republican Senators and Representatives have decried Single Payer as being worth somewhat less than a bucket of warm spit, my I point out a minor fact? In my 26 years of active duty (and please do NOT thank me for my service), I was under a government-controlled, clinic-based system where neither I nor my dependents had a choice of doctor.
When I retired, I had the "opportunity" to participate in that last gasp of the first Bush administration: Tricare. That's a single payer system with copays. Over the course of the Clinton administration, the wrinkles in the Tricare system were addressed, and it now operates a lot better than the insurance plans that my civilian colleagues and friends enjoy.
When I become eligible for what the second Bush administration called Tricare For Life. I'm still not sure what that means, other than I am required to buy a Medicare Part B plan in order to have somewhat less coverage than I have now. But, if it goes as it usually does, that will get straightened out during the Obama administration. The way the political scene is going, that's 12 years. Good.
The upshot of this rawmaesh? If government-provided health care and single payer systems are so bloody bad, why are these the systems provided for the troops, whether active, reserve, or retired? Any Republicans want to explain this?
Login or Register to post comments.