McConnell froze....

[Butler1000]

From what I understand France has a public-private mix. With Obamacare firmly established and more money going to Medicaid, our system doesn't have the major gaps that existed years ago. As I mentioned before, some of the Canadians bemoan that we don't have a single payer system. I'm not convinced that the U.S. needs to adopt this system. I think each system brings it's own set of problems.

Of course, if you are a liberal Canadian you believe govt. provided single payer healthcare is the best system.



If the U.S. allows medical products and pharma companies to make good profits, it certainly makes it easier for other governments to fix the price. There is a certain idealism that hits healthcare. For some reason those who tend to believe in free markets and the profit incentive, throw that to the wind with medical care providers, pharma, etc.

No system is perfect, but I think the U.S. health system does underwrite tremendous medical advances that gives the whole world benefit. It's idealistic to think patented pharmaceuticals and medical products just exist and would under any system.

85 million are considered to be uninsured or under insured. That many isn't a gap. Its a grand canyon.

 

[WyattEarp]

85 million are considered to be uninsured or under insured. That many isn't a gap. Its a grand canyon.

Can you note the source of this information? I believe the source is propagrandizing quite a bit in an effort to promote single payer healthcare. The 85 million number would be high for even pre-Obamacare.

The basic tenet of our govt-sponsored healthcare is low income Americans are covered, seniors are covered and others have Affordable Care Act choices. Unfortunately, there are some people still opting to not carry coverage. I'm also not quite sure how under insured is defined. My chosen deductible is quite high so I am wondering if I'm considered under insured.

 

[Butler1000]

Can you note the source of this information? I believe the source is propagrandizing quite a bit in an effort to promote single payer healthcare. The 85 million number would be high for even pre-Obamacare.

The basic tenet of our govt-sponsored healthcare is low income Americans are covered, seniors are covered and others have Affordable Care Act choices. Unfortunately, there are some people still opting to not carry coverage. I'm also not quite sure how under insured is defined. My chosen deductible is quite high so I am wondering if I'm considered under insured.

Yes its about deductible. This prevents lots of healthcare, especially preventative care from occuring. As an example I get blood tests done every year, can meet with a nutritionist, my wife gets cancer screening due to family history. Other things. Even vaccinations. Flu and Covid are free. Let alone the cost of ambulances, and quite simply the fight with them I've heard about via friends.

One friend living hear still remains in awe that on the birth if their first child no bill, he had gone down to settle it in habit.

Many people take a high deductible not out of choice.

 

[WyattEarp]

Yes its about deductible. This prevents lots of healthcare, especially preventative care from occuring. As an example I get blood tests done every year, can meet with a nutritionist, my wife gets cancer screening due to family history. Other things. Even vaccinations. Flu and Covid are free. Let alone the cost of ambulances, and quite simply the fight with them I've heard about via friends.

One friend living hear still remains in awe that on the birth if their first child no bill, he had gone down to settle it in habit.

Many people take a high deductible not out of choice.

So you are promoting the Canadian system. I however still don't know how the 85 million figure came about.

It can be difficult to understand if you have been brought up with a comprehensive govt.-provided system, but the U.S. employs an insurance model. As is known, low income families/individuals and seniors are covered. Everyone else makes judgments about their risk and has a stake in the process. Since I choose a high deductible, I'm very aware of what needs to be done and what procedures and care cost. Deductibles aside health insurance covers a lot of preventative care. That's how are system has evolved over the last few decades. From what I understand, the Affordable Care Act mandated certain coverages for employer-provided plans.

Since you raised child birth, Americans are incredibly adept at managing their healthcare around birthing children. It might seem superfluous to expect that of people, but your advocating a system that essentially has the government taking caring of everything and leaving little responsibility to the individual. That's not a criticism, but it's certainly a reality that changes your perception.

Now if I and others are considered under insured that's because the statement "under insured" doesn't really recognize what the concept of insurance is.

 

[Frankfooter]

Can you note the source of this information? I believe the source is propagrandizing quite a bit in an effort to promote single payer healthcare. The 85 million number would be high for even pre-Obamacare.

The basic tenet of our govt-sponsored healthcare is low income Americans are covered, seniors are covered and others have Affordable Care Act choices. Unfortunately, there are some people still opting to not carry coverage. I'm also not quite sure how under insured is defined. My chosen deductible is quite high so I am wondering if I'm considered under insured.

I still hear stories about people with insurance who went broke in the US when they got sick and ran over coverage.
That doesn't happen here.

 

[y2kmark]

Kentucky has a Democratic Governor so nothing is predetermined.

The more you know........

So he gets a list of three extreme right wing hacks. Under recently rigged legislation all the "choice" he would have would be is door #1, door#2 or door #3. They would all be bad news...

 

[WyattEarp]

So he gets a list of three extreme right wing hacks. Under recently rigged legislation all the "choice" he would have would be is door #1, door#2 or door #3. They would all be bad news...

It's unfortunate in my view whenever a Governor has to appoint legislators. I'm not sure it's any worse to involve the state legislators.

One thing you are overlooking is that if Kentucky appoints a right-wing hack the appointee still needs to stand for election in 2026. So it might actually behoove the Democratic Governor to appoint an extreme right-wing candidate.

Do you like a system whereby party hacks select the party candidate for your riding? Just curious.

 

[mandrill]

So you are promoting the Canadian system. I however still don't know how the 85 million figure came about.

It can be difficult to understand if you have been brought up with a comprehensive govt.-provided system, but the U.S. employs an insurance model. As is known, low income families/individuals and seniors are covered. Everyone else makes judgments about their risk and has a stake in the process. Since I choose a high deductible, I'm very aware of what needs to be done and what procedures and care cost. Deductibles aside health insurance covers a lot of preventative care. That's how are system has evolved over the last few decades. From what I understand, the Affordable Care Act mandated certain coverages for employer-provided plans.

Since you raised child birth, Americans are incredibly adept at managing their healthcare around birthing children. It might seem superfluous to expect that of people, but your advocating a system that essentially has the government taking caring of everything and leaving little responsibility to the individual. That's not a criticism, but it's certainly a reality that changes your perception.

Now if I and others are considered under insured that's because the statement "under insured" doesn't really recognize what the concept of insurance is.

That's really an attempt to whitewash a pretty sad and deficient system.

 

[WyattEarp]

That's really an attempt to whitewash a pretty sad and deficient system.

It's so different mandrill then it was twenty years ago. There are always certain progressive outlets always criticizing the U.S. system. They want mandated govt.-payer healthcare. They wanted it all along, but there is not popular support.

There's no sense wasting anger on how different countries perceive things. I admire the Canadian system, but I am in no rush to adopt it (nor criticize it).

 

[Dutch Oven]

I'd hate to use the washrooms in the US Senate. It seems they just don't flush the toilet there!

 

[Butler1000]

So you are promoting the Canadian system. I however still don't know how the 85 million figure came about.

It can be difficult to understand if you have been brought up with a comprehensive govt.-provided system, but the U.S. employs an insurance model. As is known, low income families/individuals and seniors are covered. Everyone else makes judgments about their risk and has a stake in the process. Since I choose a high deductible, I'm very aware of what needs to be done and what procedures and care cost. Deductibles aside health insurance covers a lot of preventative care. That's how are system has evolved over the last few decades. From what I understand, the Affordable Care Act mandated certain coverages for employer-provided plans.

Since you raised child birth, Americans are incredibly adept at managing their healthcare around birthing children. It might seem superfluous to expect that of people, but your advocating a system that essentially has the government taking caring of everything and leaving little responsibility to the individual. That's not a criticism, but it's certainly a reality that changes your perception.

Now if I and others are considered under insured that's because the statement "under insured" doesn't really recognize what the concept of insurance is.

The difference is simple. We think of it as a human right, that everyone deserves, Americans consider it a commodity, to be sold at the best price.

 

[WyattEarp]

The difference is simple. We think of it as a human right, that everyone deserves, Americans consider it a commodity, to be sold at the best price.

Perhaps it can be considered a human right in a wealthy country. However if you turn the issue around, it no longer is just about the govt. providing a citizen a basic necessity. It becomes the government taking away people's right to have their own private insurance.

There is an American or two here. I'm not sure what they think our Courts would do. Our Courts have always leaned toward individual freedoms and choice. I'm not saying Canada lacks freedom, but perhaps your govt. was able to become essentially become the monopoly health insurer by skirting some laws.

 

[mandrill]

It's so different mandrill then it was twenty years ago. There are always certain progressive outlets always criticizing the U.S. system. They want mandated govt.-payer healthcare. They wanted it all along, but there is not popular support.

There's no sense wasting anger on how different countries perceive things. I admire the Canadian system, but I am in no rush to adopt it (nor criticize it).

I don't know anyone - any family or friends in the US - who wouldn't far prefer the Canadian system. I can go through my entire life having necessary medical care of the highest quality and never having to worry about whether I will have coverage or be forced into bankruptcy.

I find it absolutely fucking impossible to believe that there is ANYONE in your country who would actually prefer your fucked up system.

There's not popular support?!?!?!..... There's no possibility of passing any bills, you mean?!.... Because the insurance industry, the pharmaceutical industry and the health care industry have their dicks so far up the GOP's ass that its sticking out the party's mouth!

 

[Butler1000]

Perhaps it can be considered a human right in a wealthy country. However if you turn the issue around, it no longer is just about the govt. providing a citizen a basic necessity. It becomes the government taking away people's right to have their own private insurance.

There is an American or two here. I'm not sure what they think our Courts would do. Our Courts have always leaned toward individual freedoms and choice. I'm not saying Canada lacks freedom, but perhaps your govt. was able to become essentially become the monopoly health insurer by skirting some laws.

See.....you still think in terms of profit. Your argument is the insurance, pharmaceutical and private medical one. Ask any average person if the price drop is worth it.

Btw you have less choice. We don't have "death panels". You do. With coverage denial. I can choose any doctor, you are stuck with who insurance tells you to go to. Same with hospitals.

And in I believe 5 states there is only one insurance provider. Have to look that up. Not much choice there.

 

[Valcazar]

Since you raised child birth, Americans are incredibly adept at managing their healthcare around birthing children.

Given the maternal and infant mortality rates in the US, there are many people who will disagree with you.

 

[Frankfooter]

Given the maternal and infant mortality rates in the US, there are many people who will disagree with you.

Don't mention the declining life expectancy in the US, a stat that makes them rather unique.