Why Can't America Have a Grown-Up Healthcare Conversation? 

vlogbrothers wut...what is this numerical conundrum? (Might've used that word wrong...)

Happy Cluesday!

Give me a clue and i will buy your book

Joshua Bernardino You're ascing the right question.

Ok so I'm thinking it's element numbers. I'll be right back.

Yet the amount of people who would get affordable health insurance would offset those who lost their jobs. You make a good point, but I feel like the needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few.

Declan Newton I'd personally be okay with that. If my taxes going to universal healthcare means a person and their family didn't have to worry about going bankrupt over medical issues on top of everything then good. That becomes one less thing that family needs to worry about while the parent(s) are searching for a new job.

> would end up in dire poverty Some portion would end up in poverty. The people in high-paying jobs would be on unemployment for a while and the find sales/insurance jobs in other industries. But if we want to lower costs, we have to cut jobs. The only ways to lower spending involve paying people less money.

Universal Basic Income is inevitable and also solves this issue.

How many people are dying? Not many, none that single payer would prevent for certain. It's not personal debt vs economic stability and GOOD jobs. You're just trading off who has to live in poverty and the trade off is that both the people already in it plus some go into worse poverty.

@@sonnyankau9239 If a few thousand health insurance paper pushers have to find new careers in order for a million lives to be saved, I can live with that. That might seem callous to someone in the health insurance industry, but most of them have never had to face medical bankruptcy, or death by a treatable condition all while dealing with an obstinate insurance company that doesn't give a damn if they live or die. If you try to tell me finding a new job is more difficult than that, I won't believe you.

​@@sonnyankau9239 In that case, I sincerely hope you never have to know what it's like to have your life tied to a $5000 per month price tag.

Can you stop all this sensationalist nonsense and offer up some possible solutions instead? Thanks

That's kind of my view on it as well, honestly. John made an excellent point that the loss of those jobs (and high-paying jobs, at that) won't be painless for those that currently work in the healthcare industry, and I really do acknowledge that, and think that any plan to transition to a Medicare-For-All system should also specifically address the massive job losses for that sector. However, the fact remains that the for-profit healthcare industry is a losing bet, by definition! And we essentially are holding those people's livelihoods as leverage against all the harm that those jobs' functions create. If we had an entire industry in the USA where 40,000 people went to work every day to shovel piles of money into a giant furnace, then it would be a very stupid argument to say "yes, the money-burning industry may cause a lot of harm to the economy, but please think of those poor 40,000 people who make a living as money-shovelers and furnace operators! They'll lose their livelihoods if we stop paying them to burn money!"

That's a very interesting point, actually.

Flo and it’s very true, been a year into my medical job life and it’s horrible how long we actually spend on insurance papers

@@OneEyeShadow interestingly I think Andrew Yang talked about it here: ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-GntyiSeOgLo.html

On top of that, Doctors often have to order less definitive tests that are covered by the patient’s health insurance as to not put the patient in debt. This can often lead to multiple tests being needed, and a delay in diagnosis, which can be dangerous.

Accountability

Because he would've died on the waiting list. My grandfather died waiting for care in cancada

...yeah, I never heard of someone who had the same experience in Germany. Plus, at least he'd have the right to get health care. Imagine how many people die in the US who wouldn't have to die under EU ou Canadian standarts

Walt (The Breaking Bad guy) actually was able to afford healthcare (w/o drug money), but sold meth for egotistical reasons.

Vera Eich American health care failing? What are you smoking? American health care is the best in the planet, there's no fucking question, all the statistics and objective measures say do. Canadian health care is TERRIBLE, you need to wait up to 10 hours to even see a fucking doctor in an emergency room unless your life is on the line. Busted arm and in excruciating pain? Too bad, go wait several hours.

USA! USA! USA! USA!

I completely agree. I'm Canadian and I just graduated medical school. I did rotations in the UK, Canada and the US so I feel like I have a pretty balanced experience when it comes to this. I would much rather get sick in Canada or the UK over the US (assuming I were a citizen of all). Yes the Canadian and UK healthcare systems are far from perfect, but their hugely eclipsed by the issues with the American system. I don't ever want to be a doctor in the US.

Thanks, gotta love the pollies who pushed that one through. :)

Donald Trump even agreed that Australia has a much better health care system.

So what do you think we can do to improve the Healthcare system in the US?

melvinlow888 Stop being "American" and actually listen to other nations. The "America is the greatest country in the world" trope that everyone buys into prevents America from growing as quickly as we could. Admitting when you're wrong is one of the greatest qualities one can have. And one of the most difficult qualities to pick up, especially when you're told over and over again that you have the greatest country in the world in every way. Evolution has told us over millions of years, if you don't change and adapt, you die. That's a lesson worth learning.

Meany while in Canada thousands of people die in year long waiting lists for operations and thousands more from doctor screw ups.

Yup, last year they made 100 billion dollars. If they weren't making a killing they wouldn't be in this business.

The middlemen spend millions of dollars buying fucking politicians, ending up in "Medicare for all = socialism" propaganda. It's so fucking disgusting how Americans let politicians decide for them

He's not only talking about the ultra owning those companies, abolishing private insurance puts middle class people like me out of work. I still intend to vote for single payer, but it's not only a blow to the 1%, and John wasn't claiming that it was.

Sooner or later, one of our Democratic Presidential Candidates, will promise to-turn-back-on Obama Care and win the election. Obama Care is still the law of the land. Trump is just not releasing the funds. There should be no tax increases because America will push the cost to future generations. The insurance companies should like this because it does not put the insurance companies out of business like Medicare For All.

Why should we have to pay for something you can’t afford? Stealing our money because it’s “the right thing to do” is a horrible argument.

Come on now , you need to be an adult.

I am an adult, but I will not be a poor adult just to pay for ungrateful people to have heathcare@@garydeforve5055

@@bluebandit5586 dude...we pay more for LESS .. LOOK IT UP. The buggy makers are all gone now, too.

Just to make it clear. I have no idea how to make the american system better. I'm a librarian, so I can find stuff everyone else needs. But I don't know this myself, I haven't read the books or articles that is required for it. But it always seems like a cumbersome system when I hear about it from the outside. I might however be very mistaken in this.

Nah, we do have something like the NHS. There are private hospitals too, but they cost money, and most people just go to the state ones anyway, because even if there is a waiting list for some operations, it's still a pretty good system. At the start of each year, we start out having to pay a tiny bit of fees, but once you reach around 2k NOK (that's around 190 GBP or 235 USD) you get the rest of the year free. This is for all kinds of healthcare too, both doctors visits, hospital visits, shrink, you name it. There's a second limit for things like physiotherapy, at around the same amount of money. I'll probably get that too in a month or so, so then I'm done for the year.

Some idiots still don't understand the difference between GOOD public healthcare and SHIT public healthcare, namely OBAMACARE.

Karl Thomson Obama wanted to have a much better healthcare system but was blocked at every turn by the Republicans, so you can thank them for that, idiots. In the end it was watered down so much just to get it passed. It was a small step in the right direction & did help 24 million people. Now of course Trump & the Republicans have repealed it all & their own healthcare bill is so bad for the average American they've had to do it in secret because they're giving a $50,000 tax cut to only the richest Americans!

Each doctor has a few hours reserved for those who need it right away. Otherwise, it's time for a day or two. Perhaps longer if it is not urgent.

Slavery is legal in the US

@@cornholiothefirst2018 more than just the US.

@@cornholiothefirst2018 Look! Someone WHO DOESN'T KNOW WHAT SLAVERY IS LMAOOOOOOOOOOO

@@jimelton650 No, you are wrong. The 13th Amendment has the word "except" in it (it's the 6th word). Forced labor in US prisons is legal slavery, even according to the Constitution.

But prisons don’t get to sell your children

david bouy Oh we do, it is just that no one is willing to agree on anything.

@Vincent Jones Sorry for late reply, but name-calling further cements his point.

Well it's a very emotional and personal subject. Everyone has anecdotal stories.

Boom.

Oh, contraire, I think we have plenty of grown ups. But, to paraphrase Chomsky, our media/academia are pretty shitty when it comes to informing rather than manufacturing consent for the status quo. Think Iraq War, for just a small example.

THIS! It's like whenever they have a discussion about anything it's on the level of a 5th grader

grownup means balanced, balanced means it has no place in a black and white system... get rid of first past the post and the mentality that follows it and maybe you can see all those nice shades of grey

Our media has divided us, why? Commercials. The system that has granted us historical wealth has shown its dark side. The system that freed us from the shackles of serfdom have made us slaves to capitial. The irony of it all is like a work of fiction.

If universal healthcare is so great why do you need a law to make it? Kind of like, if you have "free trade", why do you need an agreement? If red states collect most of the payments from blue state federal subsidies, why do they keep voting red? Truly mysterious...

@@tylr3669 because it's good for the consumer, not the producer. if the consumer has 2 choices, pay whatever or die, they'll pay whatever. a country on the other hand can say "sup dogs, i need 1000000000 of this, who's gonna work for me and who's basically out of the market?"

More dangerously, they know very little about how insurance work, which thanks to the Dunning-Kruger effect, means that they think they know a lot more than they do.

@@ufoundbethany They should just change the name to "America effect"

Trump is a stable genius

& in the population.

@bopp9 So the kids they dance & shake their bones...

Take politicians out of our money and it'll be even easier.

Yes, indeed. As an outsider looking at US politics, it often saddens me to think how easy a lot of the biggest problems facing the US would be if the political system in that country wasn't so susceptible to lobbying and to career politicians serving their own interests first and foremost... If only the US had a parliamentary system with Proportional Representation voting, this whole healthcare debacle would have been sorted out ages ago.

I'm rather disappointed that a few replies had been marked as spam and I'm unable to restore them. A conversation needs to reflect both sides of an argument. Whilst people might not agree with the viewpoints removed, at least one of the comments made a point about pharmaceutical companies abilities to use the current healthcare system to inflate prices to extract as much money from the insurance companies as possible before their patents expire. Whilst I understand that medical research isn't cheap and companies need to recoup their expenses, they are guilty of extorting money from sick people. For example Johnson and Johnson made a 22% profit on their $70 billion revenue in 2016. That's 15.4 billion dollars. Gilead Sciences made a 55.5% profit on $32.6 billion, which is $18 billion. I appreciate the capitalist market works and companies need to make a profit. With a centralised healthcare system and no lobbyists to buy politicians, the healthcare system has stronger leverage over pricing of medicines (put very simply. I know it's a lot more complicated) The current US healthcare system leaves millions of people untreated or in massive debt, whilst others get rich on the profits of their suffering. I've always thought you can judge how good a society is, by the way they treat their most vulnerable members.

None of those things are public goods. All of those things are excludable. Also there is no metric by which one can claim that a public system betters society because it is done through coercion. Any time that a transaction isn't voluntary, one cannot claim that it makes society better off. On the contrary, it always makes society worse off.

It depends on your definition of what a public good is; it's not codified to include nonexcludability. I'm talking about services that benefit the whole of society, e.g., military, police, education, fire prevention, roads, etc. In either case, public goods are only funded via taxation - what some might call coercion. I would argue that they make society better off. Is there a nation in recent history that doesn't "coerce" its population to fund these services that you would hold as a model for the U.S.?

Yes, the economic definition of a public good is something that is non-rivalrous and non-excludable. That's literally in the definition. Look it up. Having those things under the umbrella of government as opposed to provided on the market does *not* benefit the whole of society. Value is subjective. It is something that individuals determine for themselves. No man can tell another that he benefits from something without first knowing that person's values. No, these services need not be funded through taxation. All of them can and should be offered on the open market. You could make the argument that the service itself makes people better off, but you can't make that claim about the system of coercion itself. There are no nation-wide models, but there are successful business models for each of these things. Private security, private education, private fire insurance, private roads, etc. Note that I'm talking about private ownership arising through exchange rather than the cronyist system of a government monopoly being handed over to political buddies.

I wasn't using the economic definition of public goods. Which is why I said, "public goods," and not, "the economic definition of public goods." But the greater point is that supposed successful business models for, "private security, private education, private fire insurance, private roads, etc." do not translate to democratic nations. Or at least you could not come up with any examples. Businesses are interested in making profits whereas governments are supposed to focus on upholding their constitutions and serving their citizens. Meanwhile, there are several countries where single payer works extremely well: healthcare costs are much less than ours while outcomes are higher. Also, overall satisfaction is much higher. Corruption happens anytime large amounts of money are exchanged. I don't think that's relevant to this argument. Please let me know when you have actual historic data to prove your case. I'd find it very interesting.

anything. Otherwise I could just as validly ask if wiping my ass should be a public good. "But the greater point is that supposed successful business models for, "private security, private education, private fire insurance, private roads, etc." do not translate to democratic nations. Or at least you could not come up with any examples." Yes, I can come up with examples. The US has private security in various places. It has great private education. It had a successful model of private fire insurance. It has a decent amount of private roads. Now obviously these aren't full-scale since governments typically crowd out these private alternatives, but they do exist. "Businesses are interested in making profits whereas governments are supposed to focus on upholding their constitutions and serving their citizens." Everyone looks out for their own interests, including government officials. Giving one group of people a monopoly so arbitrarily doesn't improve the quality of goods and services. "Meanwhile, there are several countries where single payer works extremely well: healthcare costs are much less than ours while outcomes are higher. Also, overall satisfaction is much higher." I agree that these single-payer systems are cheaper than what the US currently has. This is why I advocate instead for a market-based system, since healthcare in the US was cheaper before the state got involved in the healthcare market. And where we see practices posting prices for all to see, this creates competition and drives down the prices more so than public counterparts do. "Corruption happens anytime large amounts of money are exchanged. I don't think that's relevant to this argument." I think you misunderstand. I wanted to clarify the difference between having a private business marketplace (what I'm advocating) as opposed to "privatization" that politicians do by handing over a monopoly to their friends. "Please let me know when you have actual historic data to prove your case. I'd find it very interesting." I think this was addressed above. We do have examples of private versions of these goods and services. Most of them still exist today.

like. you want to PROFIT off the lives of your peers. I dunno I think it's really messed up and maybe a little evil. sorry. love the vlogbrothers. (also using the general you here)

++

I'm going to try to respond with respect to all elements of your comment, because I like to think I get where you're coming from. First things first, I really really REALLY hate this notion that people from other countries have that Americans would shoot each other for a dollar, or that you guys would give everything to make sure everyone's in perfect health. Your countries have plenty of corruption, and we have plenty of upstanding workers. I want to emphasize this because this misrepresentation of 300+ million people into a caricature does nobody any good. That being said...you have a point. It's weird, because if there's room to fight, corporations will fight for every penny they can get. So they bribe politicians and capitalize on the genuine growing pains that would come from adopting this system, pointing out that it wouldn't be as good as it is in European countries, and pointing out that all these jobs would be lost, and that there would undoubtedly be some people lost in the shuffle. These are valid concerns and complaints, but they become tools to manipulate people into acting in their own perceived best interest, which is really damaging to everyone. And this is why I hate the generalizing of America and Americans as barbaric or idiotic. People act like the choice is as clear as night and day, which infuriates me. Do you know why Trump won? Because tens of millions of disenfranchised people, the majority of which are hard-working, good people, were conned into thinking that the orange moron would care about them. Why? Because *nobody else paid attention to them for decades,* even when their towns and livelihoods were drying up and the stimulus packages didn't reach them. And when these people were finally given any acknowledgment, they're shit on for supporting someone who (pretends to) actually hear them out. I digress, though. My point is that these are (mostly) well-intentioned people fighting healthcare change. It's reductive and harmful to see them as actively fighting against the welfare of others; they just don't want their healthcare to be ruined, and don't want to see people lose their pay or their jobs for the sake of what appears to be a tax increase. Hope this gave some insight, I'm running on empty so I apologize if there were any spelling or grammar errors in the post. Have a good night!

you do know that some of the most social european countries also beat you on economic freedom right? it is far simpler than americans make it our to be, they however are caught in their various ideologies, anyone who identifies as a single ideology is essentially a part of the problem.

Lis McMillan Many Americans also strongly value the idea of individual liberty and personal responsibility and a single payer system hurts both of those ideas. They look at it as the government forcing them to do something and spend their hard earned dollars on people who may have made poor choices that made themselves sick.

Cailyn Rossiter my mom has respiratory problems and allergies, yet she can get the medication for "free", also some more expensive medication when her problems get more sever and all she does have to suffer a 1hr line in the hospital but it is worth having the safety you can get your medication. Mexico might not be a first world country, yet having health care for everyone is a relief im thankful for. I've been injured several times (thanks to stupid accidents involving being a teenager) and never feared not being able to be treated or lack medicine.

I largely agree with you (although I don't think all the lost jobs would be in that field); I'm just pointing out that we have to understand that when single payer healthcare is called a job-killing bill by its political opponents, they won't be wrong. It's up to us as a country to be able to talk about this stuff while acknowledging that change will not come without loss for some people. -John

vlogbrothers Could those people who lost the jobs get relocated to a new job involving health care?

Admittedly my comment was a bit of an exaggeration. Sadly not all jobs would be in such an ethical grey area. I think the true trade-off is in not throwing the baby out with the bathwater. Getting rid of those kind of jobs is the positive, and that needs to be weighed against the negative of losing the other jobs that aren't so grey tied to our current system.

One question. Would you be willing to give up your job and not have a job for 1 year to save random person you never met life?

Barrett Mullins people lose jobs all the time. Industries become outdated or are outsourced etc. We shouldn't keep an expensive broken system to preserve a bunch of useless redundant jobs. Bringing up a biased example is not a rational way to look at it.

I don't. It's called neutrality bias: trying to be "fair and neutral" when the facts bear out that one side is clearly and objectively right. E.g. he made some very dubious points about "hundreds of thousands" of jobs being lost, about recession and doctors/nurses losing pay. Many developed countries have made the transition from a private market based system to single payer, none of that ever happened on any large scale. A transition to single payer would leave a lot more loose cash in a lot of pockets, it would net help the economy. The idea that getting rid of the parasite health insurance industry is going to hurt is pure fear mongering propaganda.

Neutrality itself is a bias. It is the *philosophy of **_relativism._* It is the natural precursor to Trumpland in which no truth or facts exist. Nothing matters. Postmodern philosophy of anything-goes, whatever random average rules the day; whatever randomly catches the most attention online; whoever randomly get's his 5 minute fix of stardom. This is exactly how CNN and MSNBC _created_ the monster that is Trump. The truth is not "somewhere in the middle". Yes, it may be complex. Yes, it may be context dependent. But it is nevertheless real and tangible. The truth that John is desperately avoiding is, that he got lucky in the American game of massive Wealth and Education inequality. That all those Clinton era neo-liberal promises, were in fact lies. The same lies of Reagonomics. That both sides are now spouting pro *Milton Friedmann propaganda.* That his own whole well being depends for a large part on pure ideology. And that must really hurt for someone who truely believes in facts, science and education.

moismyname You don't know what you are talking about. I worked in a hospital in the UK and got paid half what I do in America for the same job. What he's saying is an indisputable fact.

Remember Healthcare is the top human right of mankind - We American people are human - Tell Un-American lawmakers, on this earth, there have been about 110 Universal healthcare nations - UHN - providing its citizens with different healthcare coverage’s policies. There have been some light coverage policies in many UHN’s. Because of what, because all of those UHN’s are poorer than America (No 1 economy of the World). We wondered how their (honest & patriotic) leaders could work that way. Do not forget one thing; American people are human like those people in 110 Universal healthcare nations in the world …

moismyname You’re wrong. Doctors in countries with universal healthcare make significantly less money than American doctors. Universal healthcare in America would require doctor’s wages to shrink unless taxpayers agree to cough up much more of their income. When doctor’s wages decrease, demand for that career will decrease. It’s already a tough career choice to make because they must go through 4-5 years of college and then 4 years of med school which puts them in ridiculous amounts of debt. Decreasing their wages would be devastating. Not to mention that millions of people would lose their jobs and over 100 million people would be forced out of their private health insurance regardless of whether they like it or not.

Maybe it's because Labour (as well as Lib Dems, Greens, event the Tories) like the single payer system in the abstract, but have disagreements about how to get the best healthcare for the most people. Even UKIP doesn't want to privatize the NHS.

Anthony: on the other hand, lots of americans seem to stick to free market more as a dogma than as a rational principle.

(at least in America) america is so far behind other nations

Dunno. -John

There Is not IDea what's in the boxes?

+vlogbrothers Honestly this bothered me more than the collar. John, how do you not know? Aren't they in your office/filming space? My curiosity must be sated.

whylime21 Cmon, what's in the fucking box??!

Gwyneth Paltrow's head

I'm Canadian as well, and you summed up my thoughts perfectly. I was once in conversation with an cab driver in Chicago, and healthcare systems came up and when I explained the Canadian system, he said "But then you have higher taxes." On the very surface, it's a valid point, sure, but factoring in everything else, it's a small sacrifice to pay (literally) for your health and the health of others.

Twelvecarpileup Of course remember that your taxes may increase but you'll not be spending a not insignificant amount of cash that you may not need to use. It's an effective indirect taxation for most, either individuals or businesses with a huge relative burden on the lower income scale

Twelvecarpileup: You get a bill for the treatment for injuries from falling off the deck every time you pay your taxes. Actually, that isn't quite accurate. You pay for other people for falling off their decks even if you go through your entire life never falling off your own deck. You pay for people's health problems from using drugs, cigarettes, alcohol, sugary and fatty foods and sitting around on their couch all the time even if you eat healthily and exercise regularly. Ain't collectivism great?

I pay for my neighbor's fire protection and for their kids to be educated too. And yes, it is great, because it's great to live in a functioning society instead of an every-man-for-himself hellscape.

You get a bill for walking on a sidewalk every time you pay your taxes. Actually, that isn't quite accurate. You pay for other people for walking on sidewalks even if you go your entire life without walking on a sidewalk in their town. You pay for people's ability to move around from roads, transit and air travel all the time even if you never drive take the bus or fly. It's called taxes. That's how society functions. Isn't society great?

We are also the only western country with a gigantic-ass population "But James what about Brazil they have a gigantic-ass population" lol do you really wanna be like Brazil

Single Payer means each person paying for himself (or herself). Insurance Industries should change its career by building more hospitals and clinics … Healthcare is human right granted by God - don’t make this human right profitable to feed evils and political puppets …

@@JamesIsAway Thats fair. I do NOT want to be like the USA either. For just as many reasons as not wanting to be like Brazil. Thankfully my nation is NOT like either.

We are the only modern developed country without it. Simple as that.

Thank you for saying something that we desperately need Americans to be saying all over the place "This may be uncomfortable for me but I will support it because I get that it's part of a greater good." The biggest wall I run into on political issues with people is when they won't look up and consider the whole, when they let their own discomfort in things not working how they think, that they are a cog in the system, get in the way of being open to what the real trade offs of changes are. (Healthcare, EPA, Climate Change, Education.) Thank you.

That is very heroic. We need more people like you!

So what about a system like we have here in the Netherlands? We have health insurance companies, but rather than leaving them free to use (and sadly often abuse) their power, we very strictly regulate them. The government decides which treatments are part of the basic insurance package which every insurance company hás to offer, which involves basically every medical treatment except dentistry, plastic surgery and alternative medicine, and then lets companies compete to get the lowest price for that basic package. Every private individual is also legally obliged to have health insurance, and all health insurance companies are obliged to take on every client that wishes to join them, regardless of pre-existing conditions. As a result, the average Dutch person pays about €100 a month in health insurance to get full coverage of anything they might actually need, and less well-off people can get up to 80% of that money back from the government.

@Rovert Faber, thats generally what the ACA was trying to do. The issue is that there aren't any people either side of our political spectrum who are willing to bear the weight of a hard and fast transition (painful) or an aching fazing out transition.

Thank you ma'am for being a reasonable empathic human. And it might just be you're skillset and knowledge would be useful to a new national healthcare system.Be nice to have a government job.

@@dfzdjs The extra money per procedure is not due to the doctors salaries, it is due to the bureaucracy and middle men ie: insurance companies. Their non-existence would be the bearing of the cost.

David Zhuravlev Costa are high because insurance are ferocious middle men who demand money from hospitals and insurance holders

Good job my friend! Most costs are not derived from doctors/therapists/nurses compensations, but from the overhead and godless compensations for the executives.

David Zhuravlev Most of the excessively high costs are not derived from doctors/therapists/nurses/maintenance compensations, but from the overhead and godless compensations for the executives. Big pharma also plays a big role when they price bandaids at $5 a piece. Same with medications etc. You know, basic economics.

I am glad I could provide this public service. (Wheezywaiter named it and invented the spelling, for the record!) -John

No, you don't love capitalism. No, there aren't things that make more sense socialized. No, healthcare isn't one of those things. You need logic and economics.

James Adams im sick of your comments on nearly every comment here ! is this your job? it explains everything!

Tough. That means that I've said something that debunks either a falsehood or irrational aspect of your ideology. You can either reject that which offends your nonsensical views or you can accept the truth.

James Adams um... considering you didn't actually make any real arguments, I'm gonna guess thats not the case.

James Adams Please explain.

Healthcare isn't "complicated in other developed nations"? Well if you want to start on a false-premise, you're going to have a very misguided conversation.

Healthcare is anything but not complicated.

@@ThatsRight1776 Well the fact that your don’t accept universal healthcare proves you’re fucking ignorant

@Luís Filipe Andrade If you have to ask that question you really haven't given it much thought.

​@Luís Filipe Andrade I don't live in America. I live in a country that values human life enough to provide healthcare to all it's citizens, and even tourists. The fact that the US refuses to join the rest of the developed world in this area is not on me.

@Luís Filipe Andrade I just have to point out that your comment oozes of insecurity and brainwashed American exceptionalism. Are you really suggesting that the only people who should be able to criticize bad systems are the ones who live under them? I still haven't told you what country I live in, yet you make pretty bald assertions about my homeland. When it comes to the cost of healthcare for all, even studies conducted by conservative outlets conclude that it saves a lot of money. So it's not some fairy tale, pie in the sky, unicorns and rainbows, wishful, impossible thing to fund. Besides, when it comes to funding things you're giving the military a blank check to destabilize entire regions. So the problem isn't that you can't afford it. And the large immigration wave from Europe to the Americas that happened in the 1800s occurred in a world that is totally different from the one we live in today, so that's just another mute point. And it' not on me, because I don't have voting power in the US, but I do care about human well being. The US is the wealthiest nation in human history, and yet you're struggling to keep up. It's embarrassing.

This is something most people don't want to accept. Medicare is forcing the true cost of care onto paying customers. Expanding it doesn't make all things cheap. The costs must be paid by some entity.

Single payer enables government to look at things from a society-wide perspective. The UK, Canada, France etc. all pour way more money into preventative care (i.e. vegetables) than the U.S. does.

SNMtv the drift is increasing, both sides are getting a lot more poisonous, legit sometimes think a second civil war might be coming with both sides ever more increasingly salty and bitter and armed

Cory D Won't work, they've made it so if you take money from the military you take jobs too.

That would be up for debate because most of that money will be going to Halliburton, Blackwater (or whatever it is they're called these days) and other contractors who charge the Gov't insane amounts of money for their services. Whatever money is taken from the military, use it to help fund companies that make & install solar panels. Thousands of people will be employed and the jobs will make a POSITIVE difference.

Cory D what, you don't think $25 million is enough. Americans spend their money stupidly too.

We already put 500 billion a year into medicaid.... and over 900 billion a year on healthcare given out by the government...

Barrett Mullins Your point is.

Only healthy people would make that argument

Ron H have you been to American emergency rooms? American health care is still MUCH more expensive than Sweden (so even saying Sweden health care is expensive when we're talking about the us system is basically a lie/just wrong) and leads to many more deaths and bankruptcies than Sweden. Sweden definitely isn't perfect but compared to America it is still better.

but health insurance companies are making record amounts of money since obamacare was passed....

cue 500 absolutely inexplicable likes

Hopefully right before anyone who's responsible large big box chain stores.

You should watch Healthcare Triage. John doesn't host it, but he does executive produce the show and it goes into MUCH more detail on healthcare economics, politics, and reform. The host on the show is an MD who runs his own practice, so he has a great amount of insight into the intricacies of the US System.

Here is some health economics. I worked for a place which designs and manufactures medical electronics, blood cell counters and the like. Intricate, complicated stuff. Then the Affordable Care Act was passed and signed into law by Obama. The ACA has a 2.5% excise tax in it. I find many people don't even know what an excise tax is so I'll explain it. An excise tax is a tax which is levied on revenue instead of profit, thus it is a tax which can cause a company to start losing money. The company for which I worked had their profit cut from $100 million to $50 million. Over 12% of the company was laid off because of this, thousands of people. This primarily hit the research development and quality control departments which really puts the skids on future technological development. So it just doesn't affect those of us who lost our jobs, but the public at large. You, after all, will need what is produced by this company one way or another. Other medical device manufacturers which put even more into research and development than our company actually did start to lose money when this tax went into effect. I'd hate to see what the layoffs were like at those companies if they are even in business anymore. I've kept in touch with those I used to work with. This company really believed in producing the products in the USA since it was the vision of the founder of the company. They tried to weather the storm in hopes that the ACA would be repealed by the next administration after Obama. That the new administration and Congress still hasn't repealed that law has led those on the company's board to conclude that the handwriting is on the wall. They are moving all production to Malaysia and this company has produced their product in the USA for 52 years so now the entire domestic workforce is going to lose their jobs except for the few who do field service in the USA. These are also well paying jobs which are not being replaced. The people who work there are going to have a hard time staying in food and home after this. Just the possibility that the ACA would be repealed has caused people to say that jobs would be lost if it did happen. That's interesting. These jobs that would be lost if the ACA were repealed are those being supported by that excise tax. These same people didn't have a bit of concern at the private sector job loss that occurred as this tax went into effect. Odd, don't you think? The lesson to be learned from this is that government should just stay the hell out of things.

And the stupid ObamaCare bronze plan is nearly as expensive as the excellent coverage I had through that employer.

Timothy Chin lol, no.

People are dying regardless, and the "people losing Medicaid equals people dying" line is nonsense.

No this is Patrick Under obamacare*

No this is Patrick we don't really care

IF you don't care that people are dying, while talking about HEALTH CARE (read the words multiple times if you get confused), then you are not part of the conversation

Lily Dahlgren his collar maybe.

key point here being: as intended by who

Drakan R the people who set it up?

Not the middle class and poor people that is for sure.

www.opensecrets.org/politicians/

+

@RedGoat fantastic debate m8

@RedGoat Calling someone a socialist isn't an insult, when what you are referring to is basic health care for all citizens. That's a compliment.

@RedGoat And if he is a socialist, what of it? Tell me why that is a bad thing.

@RedGoat conservatives calling people socialists and communists without having any idea of what that means is funny.