PDA

View Full Version : Dennis Kucinich and Healthcare




jbrace
07-22-2009, 04:17 PM
http://www.democracynow.org/2009/7/21/as_obama_continues_push_for_healthcare

What do you guys think?

BenIsForRon
07-22-2009, 05:31 PM
I think single payer is much better than what we have now and what we may have under Obama.

That said, deregulation of doctor's office is the best route.

jbrace
07-22-2009, 05:46 PM
I think single payer is much better than what we have now and what we may have under Obama.

That said, deregulation of doctor's office is the best route.

I talked to a doctor that I had to go to for work to get a physical, and he said public healthcare is just going to make the cost of everthing double. He wanted to see healthcare return to the unregulated free-market, I really liked him. :)

Epic
07-22-2009, 05:49 PM
http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?t=200846

Read through this thread we just did

paulitics
07-22-2009, 05:49 PM
Unregulated free market is the only way for healthcare to go down. Compare health care insurance rates of a liberal fascist sate like NJ, NY or CA to a more business friendly state. The proof is in the pudding.

jmdrake
07-22-2009, 09:17 PM
Single payer is the worst possible option. That's because you no longer have anything else to fall back on. I live in Tennessee and my states experiment with an attempt an universal coverage is what has turned me off completely to government run healthcare. (No, it wasn't single payer). A republican governor pushed it through. Then he tried to sneak in an income tax to pay for it. (He claimed he was only trying to "end the tax on food"). Needless to say the new tax didn't pass. He didn't run for reelection (don't know if he was eligible). A democrat got in and began booting people off the rolls to save costs. (I'm mentioning party because some mistakenly think it's always the dem who's tax and spend and the republican who lacks compassion. Both governors sucked for different reasons). Some of what is predicted to happen under Obama's plan happened in Tennessee. Companies dropped coverage to buy into the state plan. Prices went up. Costs weren't contained and in the end it just wasn't sustainable.

Kucinich is mistaken on this issue, although I agree with the idea that the states have the right to choose this road if they wish. Which makes me wonder what's the point of his bill? (I'm not going to wade through the entire interview. Amy Goodman gets on my nerves.) From what I did listen too, DK pointed out that California tried to pass single payer twice only to have it vetoed by the governor. So how would DK's bill change anything?

BenIsForRon
07-22-2009, 09:40 PM
I agree that single payer isn't sustainable, but how is it less sustainable than what we currently have? Or even the Obama-public insurance thing?

Single payer is simply a fund that everyone is forced to pay into, and then every medical procedure they have is simply charged to that fund. In canada, it seems to be working for the most part, as far as people that need urgent care are getting it in a timely fashion.

Another good thing about single payer is that the proposed American version would be more free market than Canada's. All hospitals and doctor's offices would continue to be run privately, its just the money for procedures that comes from the government. Supposedly, there would be no bureaucracy between the doctor and patient.

Like I said, I don't really support single payer, I'm just doing this for the sake of debate. I do think the version proposed by many single payer proponents in this country is vastly superior to our current system. However, I believe as our economy continues to contract, government health care plans won't be able to deal with the market fluctuations. Like in Britain and Canada, their systems have done fairly well under growing economies, but how will they stand up as things go south?

tonesforjonesbones
07-22-2009, 09:41 PM
Dennis Kucinich is a self proclaimed socialist. He does NOT have much in common with the Liberty movement. tones

jmdrake
07-22-2009, 10:10 PM
I agree that single payer isn't sustainable, but how is it less sustainable than what we currently have? Or even the Obama-public insurance thing?


In Japan the healthcare system will cease to exist if they don't back away from their current government run model.

See: http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=89626309

Look at the bottom of the page.



Single payer is simply a fund that everyone is forced to pay into, and then every medical procedure they have is simply charged to that fund. In canada, it seems to be working for the most part, as far as people that need urgent care are getting it in a timely fashion.


The word "forced" is the problem in the above system. Also Canada has very long waiting lines. The problem is so bad that they've now set up a "wait time reduction fund."

http://www.hc-sc.gc.ca/hcs-sss/qual/acces/wait-attente/index-eng.php

And people here in the U.S. get urgent care in a timely fashion regardless of ability to pay. But that's not good enough for some people. I was talking to one uninsured person who complained that he didn't get treated by the local indigent hospital after being in a car wreck and hitting his head. I asked "They didn't do any tests"? He said "They just x-rayed me. They didn't give me anything for pain". I tried to explain to this poor ignorant soul that the x-ray WAS treatment and that it probably cost a lot more than they pain medicine he craved so badly but probably didn't need.



Another good thing about single payer is that the proposed American version would be more free market than Canada's. All hospitals and doctor's offices would continue to be run privately, its just the money for procedures that comes from the government. Supposedly, there would be no bureaucracy between the doctor and patient.


And pigs will fly someday too. Keyword above is "supposedly". One of the big selling points of so called "health care reform" is lower costs. If someone else is footing the bill and if there is no "bureaucracy" to hold down costs then what is there to stop the costs from increasing astronomically? The answer, of course, is nothing. Costs will spiral out of control and the government will be forced to cut services and/or persons receiving them. Wishful thinking doesn't get you around economics.



Like I said, I don't really support single payer, I'm just doing this for the sake of debate. I do think the version proposed by many single payer proponents in this country is vastly superior to our current system.


No it's not.



However, I believe as our economy continues to contract, government health care plans won't be able to deal with the market fluctuations. Like in Britain and Canada, their systems have done fairly well under growing economies, but how will they stand up as things go south?

The British health care system is horrible right now. Things are so bad that they are seriously considering denying needed care to the elderly. Really if you think Britain has good health care then you need to do more research.

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601039&sid=aLzfDxfbwhzs

jmdrake
07-22-2009, 10:10 PM
Dennis Kucinich is a self proclaimed socialist. He does NOT have much in common with the Liberty movement. tones

He's got about as much in common as with the Liberty movement as Glen Beck.

almantimes2
07-22-2009, 10:13 PM
At least He speaks out against the fed and foreign interventionism a lot.

Other then that I hate him.

BenIsForRon
07-22-2009, 10:24 PM
bunch of stuff

Cool. I'm not a health care expert, I've just seen and read a few things on single payer, so I figure I could enlighten some people on how that would work.

Here's the thing though. We have thousands of people that go bankrupt in this country because of some unforseen medical problem. I just wish there was a way we could separate from the insurance companies to free up that capital that they waste on marketing and other non-medical costs.

And until guys like Ron Paul give more specific answers than "freedom works", we're not going to make any headway on this issue.

jmdrake
07-22-2009, 10:48 PM
Cool. I'm not a health care expert, I've just seen and read a few things on single payer, so I figure I could enlighten some people on how that would work.

Here's the thing though. We have thousands of people that go bankrupt in this country because of some unforseen medical problem. I just wish there was a way we could separate from the insurance companies to free up that capital that they waste on marketing and other non-medical costs.

And until guys like Ron Paul give more specific answers than "freedom works", we're not going to make any headway on this issue.

Dr. Paul has given specific answers. He's already put forward bills to address healthcare reform. Some of his proposals are in this thread:

http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?t=200846

I saw another thread that had other health related bills that I can't put my finger on. Basically the proposals come down to this:

1) Fully open up health savings accounts. Right now they are tied to your employer and you have to "guess" the amount to put in. If you put too much in you lose it at the end of the year. If you put too little in you'll have to come out of pocket without any tax break.

2) End antitrust provisions that prevent doctors from negotiating with patients to use arbitration instead of lawyers.

3) Lower regulation to allow more competition in health care especially from natural supplements that are prevented from making claims about their products without the lengthy and expensive FDA process.

I know proposal # 1 would help me directly and I know uninsured small businessmen that might insure themselves under such a plan.

tonesforjonesbones
07-23-2009, 08:59 AM
JM Drake..you are dead wrong. You obviously have NOT been listening to Beck lately. Beck is a libertarian. I get so SICK of cliquish people who don't listen, research and think for themselves. When is the last time you watched or listened to Glenn Beck's show? tones

jmdrake
07-23-2009, 12:44 PM
JM Drake..you are dead wrong. You obviously have NOT been listening to Beck lately. Beck is a libertarian. I get so SICK of cliquish people who don't listen, research and think for themselves. When is the last time you watched or listened to Glenn Beck's show? tones

Riiiight. Beck has come out now against the Iraq war? Beck now supports repealing the unPatriot Act? Is he ready to get rid of Homeland inSecurity? Is he ready to pull out of Afghanistan? Gee, last I heard of Beck he had jumped on the "That holocaust museum shooter was worshipped by the truth movement" bandwaggon. Sorry, but he's not the "hero" you've been lead to believe. Yes he's good on some issues. Kucinich is good on some issues. Some issues that Kuncinich is right on Beck is wrong on. Some issues Beck is right on Kucinich is wrong on. Both support auditing the fed. Kucinich was coming out against the fed when Beck was still carrying Bush's water and ranting about "islamofascism".

VIDEODROME
07-23-2009, 01:05 PM
Well it seems better then national health care at least.

If a state decided to try their own health care and it fails, it damages just that state and not the entire nation and it's would be easier to undo the damage. People and businesses who decide they don't like it can flee to another state.

On the other hand if some people like how a state sets up single payer and might be interested in moving there.

In the end it offers variety and keeps away from D.C. central planning. Also most social services are run at the state level anyway like State Police.