Can anyone explain to me why single payer health care is bad for America?

[Alpha Male]

Unless we can get data to explain the reasons why people are traveling abroad for medical reasons, there are no useful conclusions we can draw about the efficacy of the heath care systems of these people's home countries.

The mere existence of people that are forced to go elsewhere for medical treatment is not enough to disparage an entire heath care system.

You really need data instead of using common sense?

What reason could someone have for refusing something for free?

 

[Black Panther]

if 50,000 people receive healthcare for free but would rather LEAVE THE COUNTRY AND PAY FOR IT INSTEAD, what does that tell you einsten??

Nothing other than what you just stated, actually. :denzelcmonson:We would need additional data (such as what important treatments/meds/physicians they need that they can't get covered/find in Canada) to make a determination.

You're assuming that because 50,000 left Canada and paid out of pocket or purchased additional insurance to get treatments abroad, it must have been for some life-threatening, debilitating reason. I have no doubts that this was the case for at least some of the 50,000 people, but I can't assume that for each one of these people.

 

[Black Panther]

You really need data instead of using common sense?

"Common sense" ain't so common.

 

[Alpha Male]

"Common sense" ain't so common.

Okay then in the interest of common sense if you were getting healthcare for free in this country, what might cause you to leave and look for it elsewhere?

 

[Black Panther]

Okay then in the interest of common sense if you were getting healthcare for free in this country, what might cause you to leave and look for it elsewhere?

Maybe there's a great plastic surgeon in Milan that my plan doesn't cover?

Maybe I really believe in acupuncture and other holistic treatments that my plan doesn't cover?

Maybe I don't trust the doctor's anywhere near where I live, and I live close to the US/Canadian border?

Maybe I was traveling in Europe and happened to have a non-life threatening medical situation that my plan doesn't cover?

We are talking about 0.15% of the population here.

 

[Alpha Male]

Maybe there's a great plastic surgeon in Milan that my plan doesn't cover?

Maybe I really believe in acupuncture and other holistic treatments that my plan doesn't cover?

Maybe I don't trust the doctor's anywhere near where I live, and I live close to the US/Canadian border?

Maybe I was traveling in Europe and happened to have a non-life threatening medical situation that my plan doesn't cover?

We are talking about 0.15% of the population here.

You're just trolling now. There would be no incentive for them to do this unless there was superior healthcare being offered here. It's obvious those people left because they couldn't get the care they needed in Canada.

And yes it's only a small portion of the population but not everyone could afford to leave the country for several weeks at a time. I imagine if the same premium care we get was readily available in their home country, way more people would be opting in to pay for it.

If you look hard enough I'm sure you can find a free meal somewhere right now but don't expect steak and lobster. You get what you pay for.

 

[Black Panther]

You're just trolling now.

(Not really, but I don't feel bad if my line of reasoning is frustrating you. )

There would be no incentive for them to do this unless there was superior healthcare being offered here. It's obvious those people left because they couldn't get the care they needed in Canada.

Here's where I'm getting hung up with your argument. I don't think that this is a reasonable inference based on the data you've provided.

You continue to make this assumption, but you haven't given any reason how or why it's "obvious" or why the examples I provided aren't sufficient incentives to leave Canada for treatment.

To quote @Pink_Freud ():

Really it just comes down to having money and going where the most advanced treatment facilities and technology is.
No one will deny that America is the most advanced technologically, so many want to take advantage of that.
Some times the Canadian hospitals just don't have enough resources so they will ship them to the states(still paying for it). But that study also has to take in account all the snowbirds and Canadians that actually live in the states part of the year. When you factor in those people the numbers don't look as high.

Plus most of those cases that ppl leave for are NOT life or death treatments.

Regardless, this just proves even more that if America actually compounded all these great technological advancements with good care for all, Americans would be so much better off.

 

[Black Panther]

I imagine if the same premium care we get was readily available in their home country, way more people would be opting in to pay for it.

How much is "way more"?

How does Canada's quality of care stack up against the US's?

Oh, wait.

However, on most measures of patient-reported physician quality, Canada comes out slightly ahead of the U.S. The Commonwealth Fund report shows somewhat fewer reported physician errors, lab errors, medication errors and duplicate tests north of the border, and Canadians report more satisfaction with their doctors. General health is also better up north, according to the World Health Organization: Life expectancy and healthy life expectancy are both higher in Canada; infant mortality is lower, and maternal mortality is significantly lower. There are fewer deaths from non-communicable diseases, cardiovascular diseases and injuries in Canada, though marginally more deaths from cancer.

Canada's quality of care is at least as good or slightly better than the US, based on patient satisfaction.

 

[Alpha Male]

bro it is literally impossible to guarantee everyone equal coverage.

impossible.

IMPOSSIBLE.

according to google there are approx 1.6 million active doctors in the U.S.

Topic: Physicians

we have over 300 million people in this country so that would mean approx .005% of the population are doctors.

which means in a community of 30,000 people there would be 150 doctors among them.

now in that group of 150 doctors you have some that graduated closer to the top of their class, some who had superior training, and some who just flat out have superior knowledge and intelligence. there is a 'best doctor', a 'worst doctor' and a sliding scale of varying degrees in between.

the best doctors clearly don't have the time or the resources to see and treat EVERYONE.

which means no matter what you do, SOMEONE is going to be stuck with a less qualified doctor.

so progressives, tell me... in this perfect utopian society how would we determine who sees which doctors? what's the fairest system.

 

[Alpha Male]

However, on most measures of patient-reported physician quality, Canada comes out slightly ahead of the U.S. The Commonwealth Fund report shows somewhat fewer reported physician errors, lab errors, medication errors and duplicate tests north of the border, and Canadians report more satisfaction with their doctors. General health is also better up north, according to the World Health Organization: Life expectancy and healthy life expectancy are both higher in Canada; infant mortality is lower, and maternal mortality is significantly lower. There are fewer deaths from non-communicable diseases, cardiovascular diseases and injuries in Canada, though marginally more deaths from cancer.

does this have to do with the healthchare system or does it have to do with how americans treat their health?

 

[Black Panther]

does this have to do with the healthchare system or does it have to do with how americans treat their health?

Not sure, but it's not necessary for me to explain that to prove my point.

 

[Black Panther]

bro it is literally impossible to guarantee everyone equal coverage.

impossible.

IMPOSSIBLE.

according to google there are approx 1.6 million active doctors in the U.S.

Topic: Physicians

we have over 300 million people in this country so that would mean approx .005% of the population are doctors.

which means in a community of 30,000 people there would be 150 doctors among them.

now in that group of 150 doctors you have some that graduated closer to the top of their class, some who had superior training, and some who just flat out have superior knowledge and intelligence. there is a 'best doctor', a 'worst doctor' and a sliding scale of varying degrees in between.

the best doctors clearly don't have the time or the resources to see and treat EVERYONE.

which means no matter what you do, SOMEONE is going to be stuck with a less qualified doctor.

so progressives, tell me... in this perfect utopian society how would we determine who sees which doctors? what's the fairest system.

You commit the Nirvana fallacy pretty often. I'm not arguing for a perfect, utopian healthcare system. Just one that gives the most people the opportunity to access healthcare without going bankrupt.

 

[Alpha Male]

You commit the Nirvana fallacy pretty often. I'm not arguing for a perfect, utopian healthcare system. Just one that gives the most people the opportunity to access healthcare without going bankrupt.

then someone is going to have get the short end of the stick.

 

[Black Panther]

then someone is going to have get the short end of the stick.

Nobody said it was "perfect". Neither does it have to be.

We don't live in a perfect world, so single-payer isn't a perfect solution. It does, however, seem to be the most good and help the most people. Way more than privatized health care.

 

[Alpha Male]

Nobody said it was "perfect". Neither does it have to be.

We don't live in a perfect world, so single-payer isn't a perfect solution. It does, however, seem to be the most good and help the most people. Way more than privatized health care.

Quoted for emphasis.

You can't guarantee that there will be enough resources for everybody when the resources are limited and everyone is drawing from the same well. You're also gonna risk having some people who unfairly take way more than they need leaving less for everyone else. There is simply no way you can guarantee that everyone will have the absolute best care when they need it. People are going to get fukked over and it's going to be completely out of their hands.

I don't know about you but I'm not willing to take that risk with my own health. I am going to do whatever I can to guarantee that my healthcare is there for me when I need it. There are plenty of people in this country who aren't rich and yet find a way to fit it into their budget because it's important to them. To them it's worth making that sacrifice. If someone doesn't want to make that same sacrifice and pass on getting insurance, that's their problem and not mine. That's a choice they make. If you want discount health insurance from the govt then be prepared for discount health care. Move and relocate to Canada, there is nothing stopping you.

The goal isn't getting rid of insurance companies because the people in this country will gladly pay a premium if it means they get premium healthcare, the goal is to lower the cost of said insurance. Only way to do that is to have multiple companies competing for business on a national scale. Gives customers a choice and creates competition in the marketplace. Only a fool would suggest that you can better quality at a lower cost by creating a monopoly.