Single Payer Health Care

[Shaul]

So what's wrong with the system in, for example, Australia?

Single payer schemes commonly suffer from some flaws such as restrictions on care (often controlled by bureaucrats) and long waits for services (care delayed is care denied). Australia’s system shares these flaws and its costs are rising faster than Australia’s inflation rate.

Australia's Health Care System Is Fine Until You Chuck a Sickie | Sukrit Sabhlok

 

[dianaiad]

Um, such decisions need to be made in all cases where there are limited resources. It's not a flaw of socialised medicine, it's a triage issue. You'll find the exact same sorts of things going on in the US. Notable examples would be with organ donations, for example.

Anyway, FWIW, I'm sorry to hear about your poor health and I wish you all the best.

Triage is where the doctors have to choose between those which can be saved, and those which cannot, or who can wait. Anybody who has ever gone to an ER with chest pain and been seen instantly over a group of croupy kids who have been waiting awhile know this.

I'm not talking about that sort of triage.

I'm talking about the sort of triage that looks at a patient and says....this one costs too much.

Autologous bone marrow transplants do not use donor marrow. The patient's OWN marrow is used. The process to ready a patient for it is a bit complicated and long, but the point is, there aren't that many people who need one, and when they do, the facilities ARE available. The actual transplant is fairly simple; no drama, no anxious moments in operating rooms...basically it's a transfusion, done in the patient's room, and lasts a whole ten minutes. Done by a nurse. The care is nursing care. Intensive nursing care, to be certain, but it's a nursing and technical thing.

The 'triage' is ALL about expense. Is this patient worth spending this much money on?

Not: can we save this patient, and if we do, are we letting others die or get worse? THAT is 'triage.'

What is happening at the level of rare cancers/conditions like MM isn't that. It's "well, do we want to spend the money it would cost to give this person a chance for ten years of remission?"

...........unfortunately, the answer from the bean counters is far too often....'no.'

Thank you for your good wishes, btw. As it happens, I'm doing very well, all things considered. I plan to stick around and bug you guys for quite some time.

 

[Kangaroo Feathers]

Single payer schemes commonly suffer from some flaws such as restrictions on care (often controlled by bureaucrats) and long waits for services (care delayed is care denied). Australia’s system shares these flaws and its costs are rising faster than Australia’s inflation rate.

Australia's Health Care System Is Fine Until You Chuck a Sickie | Sukrit Sabhlok

Long waitrs occur because everyone can access the services. I find that preferable to a system where there are shorter wait times because some people are excluded.

 

[Kangaroo Feathers]

Triage is where the doctors have to choose between those which can be saved, and those which cannot, or who can wait. Anybody who has ever gone to an ER with chest pain and been seen instantly over a group of croupy kids who have been waiting awhile know this.

I'm not talking about that sort of triage.

I'm talking about the sort of triage that looks at a patient and says....this one costs too much.

Autologous bone marrow transplants do not use donor marrow. The patient's OWN marrow is used. The process to ready a patient for it is a bit complicated and long, but the point is, there aren't that many people who need one, and when they do, the facilities ARE available. The actual transplant is fairly simple; no drama, no anxious moments in operating rooms...basically it's a transfusion, done in the patient's room, and lasts a whole ten minutes. Done by a nurse. The care is nursing care. Intensive nursing care, to be certain, but it's a nursing and technical thing.

The 'triage' is ALL about expense. Is this patient worth spending this much money on?

Not: can we save this patient, and if we do, are we letting others die or get worse? THAT is 'triage.'

What is happening at the level of rare cancers/conditions like MM isn't that. It's "well, do we want to spend the money it would cost to give this person a chance for ten years of remission?"

...........unfortunately, the answer from the bean counters is far too often....'no.'

It's the same principle as A+E triage. Further, I'm pretty sure that in the American system, insurers make decisions based on cost and refuse claims by people with poor likely outcomes. Here, it is still doctors and allied professionals making decisions about who gets access to limited resources, it isn't disinterested bureaucrats. I appreciate that when it comes to personal cases, such decisions may seem unfair, but it's just the nature of the beast. Medical staff have a professional duty to see that limited resources go to the best candidates for treatment. It's basic "greatest good for greatest number" mechanics. Now, IF a poor candidate for a procedure was prepared to pay for all necessary expenses "out of pocket", even if he were judged to be a poor candidate, there's nothing in the Australian system that would stop a specialist from giving the treatment, if you could find a specialist willing to provide it.

Thank you for your good wishes, btw. As it happens, I'm doing very well, all things considered. I plan to stick around and bug you guys for quite some time.

I look forward to it for years to come.

 

[Fool]

The very Bureau you cited. You didn't look at the links.




Nothing about USPS.

it says non-postal civilians. i will concede that my research has been flawed. you might be correct.

 

[Fool]

That's why its funding is going bust in a few years?

How Will Boomers Affect Social Security? | National Academy of Social Insurance


Will Baby Boomers Bankrupt Social Security?

 

[ecco]

Until Trump came along, I can't think of a nation that's been ripped off as much as the United States by many other nations. Finally, it's time to put America first.

Considering this thread is about healthcare, please tell us all the wonderful things your bloviator-in-chief has done to improve healthcare.

 

[Shad]

How Will Boomers Affect Social Security? | National Academy of Social Insurance


Will Baby Boomers Bankrupt Social Security?

Read what I was posting. Medicare not SS. Try again

 

[Shad]

I'm talking about the sort of triage that looks at a patient and says....this one costs too much.

Autologous bone marrow transplants do not use donor marrow. The patient's OWN marrow is used. The process to ready a patient for it is a bit complicated and long, but the point is, there aren't that many people who need one, and when they do, the facilities ARE available. The actual transplant is fairly simple; no drama, no anxious moments in operating rooms...basically it's a transfusion, done in the patient's room, and lasts a whole ten minutes. Done by a nurse. The care is nursing care. Intensive nursing care, to be certain, but it's a nursing and technical thing.

The 'triage' is ALL about expense. Is this patient worth spending this much money on?

Not: can we save this patient, and if we do, are we letting others die or get worse? THAT is 'triage.'

What is happening at the level of rare cancers/conditions like MM isn't that. It's "well, do we want to spend the money it would cost to give this person a chance for ten years of remission?"

...........unfortunately, the answer from the bean counters is far too often....'no.'

Thank you for your good wishes, btw. As it happens, I'm doing very well, all things considered. I plan to stick around and bug you guys for quite some time.

I am in this boat right now. I have nerve damage but it is not considered worth treating at this time. If I want treatment I have to use my own funding. I also have issues with my hip joint that the system wont pay for until it becomes critical to the point I am completely disabled.

 

[Salvador]

Considering this thread is about healthcare, please tell us all the wonderful things your bloviator-in-chief has done to improve healthcare.

Trump did help get rid of the Obamacare tax mandate, and believe me he has got a great healthcare plan in store he'll reveal if we should overcome election interference from China against our Presidential re-election bid in 2020.

 

[dianaiad]

It's the same principle as A+E triage. Further, I'm pretty sure that in the American system, insurers make decisions based on cost and refuse claims by people with poor likely outcomes. Here, it is still doctors and allied professionals making decisions about who gets access to limited resources, it isn't disinterested bureaucrats. I appreciate that when it comes to personal cases, such decisions may seem unfair, but it's just the nature of the beast. Medical staff have a professional duty to see that limited resources go to the best candidates for treatment. It's basic "greatest good for greatest number" mechanics. Now, IF a poor candidate for a procedure was prepared to pay for all necessary expenses "out of pocket", even if he were judged to be a poor candidate, there's nothing in the Australian system that would stop a specialist from giving the treatment, if you could find a specialist willing to provide it. I look forward to it for years to come.

Here's the difference I see.

At that level, at least with me, only two questions were asked. "Is she likely to survive the treatment" and "will it do her some good?" At this level, finances don't come into it, because there is always some way to pay for it. Clinical trials, if nothing else. There is no question about 'will she be taking the place

I am in this boat right now. I have nerve damage but it is not considered worth treating at this time. If I want treatment I have to use my own funding. I also have issues with my hip joint that the system wont pay for until it becomes critical to the point I am completely disabled.

I'm sorry about that. Waiting for a condition to....er...'mature' isn't fun.

 

[Fool]

Read what I was posting. Medicare not SS. Try again

medicare is funded by the SSA


No, Medicare Won't Go Broke In 2026. Yes, It Will Cost A Lot More Money


Medicare Benefits | Social Security Administration

 

[Shad]

medicare is funded by the SSA


No, Medicare Won't Go Broke In 2026. Yes, It Will Cost A Lot More Money


Medicare Benefits | Social Security Administration

Read your link. It won't go broke if taxes are raised. Right now it is going broke. Ergo it is going broke unless X happens. X has not happened yet.

"This will inevitably mean that either premiums and/or taxes will rise; payments to doctors, hospitals, and other providers will grow more slowly; some benefits may be trimmed; or a combination of all three."

 

[Shaul]

Long waitrs occur because everyone can access the services. I find that preferable to a system where there are shorter wait times because some people are excluded.

That is no t the reason. In the U.S., by law, can access emergency medical care regardless of ability to pay. In a single payer system you have no alternative when that coverage is lacking. In more open market you have options to choose a different insurance. That provides more coverage at lower prices.

 

[Kangaroo Feathers]

That is no t the reason. In the U.S., by law, can access emergency medical care regardless of ability to pay.

I'm sick of this nonsense. Emergency medical care is great. In EMERGENCIES. For chronic conditions, it's useless. Try rocking up to an A+E department and asking for physiotherapy, chemotherapy, dialysis, or an organ transplant. Go ahead. Tell me how that goes.

In a single payer system you have no alternative when that coverage is lacking. In more open market you have options to choose a different insurance. That provides more coverage at lower prices.

Pretty sick of this scaremongering, too. Australia has private health insurance, as does the UK, and, iirc, Canada. No one's stopping people from paying for access to better standards of voluntary and specialist services. We're talking about a universal baseline of care, where everyone can access the healthcare they need, not just in acute emergencies, but to maintain a basic standard of health, without risk of bankruptcy.

When you're ready to discuss the subject in line with reality, rather than nonsense talking points, get back to me.

 

[Fool]

Read your link. It won't go broke if taxes are raised. Right now it is going broke. Ergo it is going broke unless X happens. X has not happened yet.

"This will inevitably mean that either premiums and/or taxes will rise; payments to doctors, hospitals, and other providers will grow more slowly; some benefits may be trimmed; or a combination of all three."

premiums on insurance rise every year. i don't mind cutting out the middle man.


Employees' Share of Health Costs Continues Rising Faster Than Wages

 

[Shad]

premiums on insurance rise every year. i don't mind cutting out the middle man.


Employees' Share of Health Costs Continues Rising Faster Than Wages

Sure. The problem here is Congress is the one to resolve this issue. Which due to partisan politics will be an issue until the last minute in my view.

 

[Fool]

Sure. The problem here is Congress is the one to resolve this issue. Which due to partisan politics will be an issue until the last minute in my view.

congress is elected to work for the people and not for a industry. .doesn't matter which way you go, human conflict is going to be involved. reduce the conflict by removing the middle man; which try to tell drs how to doctor and the poor shouldn't have free medical care while the working poor can't afford it. that is crazy.

 

[Shaul]

I'm sick of this nonsense. Emergency medical care is great. In EMERGENCIES. For chronic conditions, it's useless. Try rocking up to an A+E department and asking for physiotherapy, chemotherapy, dialysis, or an organ transplant. Go ahead. Tell me how that goes. Pretty sick of this scaremongering, too. Australia has private health insurance, as does the UK, and, iirc, Canada. No one's stopping people from paying for access to better standards of voluntary and specialist services. We're talking about a universal baseline of care, where everyone can access the healthcare they need, not just in acute emergencies, but to maintain a basic standard of health, without risk of bankruptcy.

When you're ready to discuss the subject in line with reality, rather than nonsense talking points, get back to me.

Australia's Health Care System Is Fine Until You Chuck a Sickie | Sukrit Sabhlok

 

[ecco]

I am in this boat right now. I have nerve damage but it is not considered worth treating at this time. If I want treatment I have to use my own funding. I also have issues with my hip joint that the system wont pay for until it becomes critical to the point I am completely disabled.

Who is deciding that your nerve damage and hip joint are not worth treating now...The Government or a private, for-profit, insurance company?