It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Whats the difference where one pays - private insurance (with deductibles/denial) or taxes?

page: 3
10
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 7 2018 @ 04:26 PM
link   

originally posted by: burdman30ott6

originally posted by: JoshuaCox
a reply to: Cabin

Easy..

With insurance companies you have a parasite taking .30 off every dollar spent on healthcare THAT IS NOT PREFORMING A HEALCARE RELATED FUNCTION!

They are a middleman taking 1/3 as a few to paper push..


That’s why every other modern country on the planet has dropped them.


I agree. Let's drop the insurance companies entirely and return to the days of the patient paying the doctor directly out of pocket for the services, up front and at the time of service. Costs would go down tremendously... but, as should be the case, you gotta pay to play and if you can't pay, well... no play for you.


Great idea - a return to the dark ages....




posted on Jul, 7 2018 @ 05:24 PM
link   
a reply to: FyreByrd

The 1950s were not the god damned "dark ages." Jesus Christ, the lack of perspective and massive quantity of hyperbole in considering it such is staggering.



posted on Jul, 7 2018 @ 06:40 PM
link   
a reply to: burdman30ott6

You mean you never learned in history how those brave insurance companies dragged us out of dark ages and brought us into the renaissance?



posted on Jul, 7 2018 @ 06:47 PM
link   

originally posted by: Puppylove
a reply to: burdman30ott6

You mean you never learned in history how those brave insurance companies dragged us out of dark ages and brought us into the renaissance?


King Arthur riding into battle with his blue cross, blue shield, and Excalibur alongside the Adjusters of the Round Claims Table.



posted on Jul, 7 2018 @ 07:14 PM
link   
a reply to: burdman30ott6

I agree. Let's drop the insurance companies entirely and return to the days of the patient paying the doctor directly out of pocket for the services, up front and at the time of service. Costs would go down tremendously... but, as should be the case, you gotta pay to play and if you can't pay, well... no play for you.

Yes. Before BC and BS there was health care in America and it was provided for those that needed care. No one except the rich ever voluntarily went to a hospital, unless they really needed to. Hospitals where almost all State hospitals and were none profit. Until a few entrepreneurs found a way to make health care an industry, the rest is history and how we got to where we are today.



posted on Jul, 7 2018 @ 08:18 PM
link   

originally posted by: burdman30ott6
a reply to: FyreByrd

The 1950s were not the god damned "dark ages." Jesus Christ, the lack of perspective and massive quantity of hyperbole in considering it such is staggering.


And the 'costs' of medical care were doable for a white middle-class single-income family. Not so much for others.



posted on Jul, 7 2018 @ 08:19 PM
link   
a reply to: FyreByrd

The point is insurance is not the savior you think it is. I don't agree with Burdman either, but seriously you act like insurance is Jesus.



posted on Jul, 7 2018 @ 08:39 PM
link   

originally posted by: FyreByrd

originally posted by: burdman30ott6
a reply to: FyreByrd

The 1950s were not the god damned "dark ages." Jesus Christ, the lack of perspective and massive quantity of hyperbole in considering it such is staggering.


And the 'costs' of medical care were doable for a white middle-class single-income family. Not so much for others.


So now we've spent a few years under a system whereby "others" have had much of the bill paid for them, at the expense of the middle class and single income families now can't afford their own medical care costs thanks to that.

The costs in the 50s were doable for all but the dirt poor and most counties had poor farms to assist those folks. The advent of insurance alongside the massive cottage industry of malpractice lawsuits caused this problem and it started in the late 40s, early 50s, becoming a nationwide disasterpiece by the 80s.



posted on Jul, 7 2018 @ 09:54 PM
link   

originally posted by: Puppylove
a reply to: FyreByrd

The point is insurance is not the savior you think it is. I don't agree with Burdman either, but seriously you act like insurance is Jesus.


I am sorry I sounded that way. I think a single payer system is the answer, Medicare for all is a start and I suppose is a type of insurance. Frankly I think Medicine for profit is obscene and that would include private insurance for profit companies.



posted on Jul, 7 2018 @ 10:09 PM
link   
a reply to: FyreByrd

I agree medicine for profit is insane but insurance is part of that con. Medical care should be a human right and a corner stone of the entire purpose of having a government.

I agree with burdman that insurance is bad but I'm pretty sure our agreement ends there.



posted on Jul, 7 2018 @ 10:24 PM
link   

originally posted by: Puppylove
a reply to: FyreByrd

I agree medicine for profit is insane but insurance is part of that con. Medical care should be a human right and a corner stone of the entire purpose of having a government.

I agree with burdman that insurance is bad but I'm pretty sure our agreement ends there.


That really doesn't make much sence... and I mean that from a purely logical stand point and not an ideological one.

From an ideological stand point I'm all abourd the single payer train. I am simply to tired deal with the constant flux that is the current American system ... if I have to pay more and/or lose services (assuming that is true... I don't know) I'm still on board. I'm willing to pay that premium so I don't have to deal with the crap we have anymore.

But back to the logical argument; "medicine for profit is insane" ... wtf? Even if you pair it down it it's most basic parts ... doctors, pharmacists, hospitals administrators, nurses and ect... no matter who pays them in the end ... they are in the business to make a profit ... to say or think otherwise is either insane in itself or some weird advocacy of slave labor.

As for "Medical care should be a human right" that idea can never be fully realized ... what exactly is the right we should have? ... we should all have access to the best medical systems our country can provide? ... impossible; there is one person who is the best neurosurgeon in our country of citizenship... we cant all see her so someone is going to have to compromise on their right and see the less capable doctor. Even if we dumb it down to "just a right to basic care" ... what the F is "basic care" ... my idea of basic care could be whildily different from other people.

No medical care is not a human right; it simple doesnt fight such a concept... and their wouldn't be any medical care professionals if we took profit out of the equation.


But again I'm all for single payer ... let's just make logical arguments in favor of it that way more people will get on board .
edit on 7-7-2018 by DanDanDat because: (no reason given)

edit on 7-7-2018 by DanDanDat because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 7 2018 @ 10:31 PM
link   
a reply to: DanDanDat

Not for profit means in this sense like being a firemen. Yes you still get paid but it's regulated and not open market where how much you get paid is based on how well you can prey on peoples needs to squeeze out more profit.

When your product determines wether a person lives or dies and wether they will be able to get relief from mind numbing pain you have the ability to take from them whatever you want in exchange. That is why medicine should not be for profit.
edit on 7/7/2018 by Puppylove because: (no reason given)

edit on 7/7/2018 by Puppylove because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 7 2018 @ 10:42 PM
link   

originally posted by: Puppylove
a reply to: DanDanDat

Not for profit means in this sense like being a firemen. Yes you still get paid but it's regulated and not open market where how much you get paid is based on how well you can prey on peoples needs to squeeze out more profit.


Soooooo... you are advocating regulating how much a person can get paid for their service ... like slavery, which was regulated to zero profit.

Listen you can advocate that we dont need a middle man insurance company who tries to suck out as much profit as can be had and provide little service. You can advocate against profiteering where people try to use a temporary shortage of services to jake up their prices.

You can't advocate for regulating a doctors income to some set criteria for all time. The doctor should make a profit based on his performance and through put. If he has a 100% cure rate and can see a bizlion people a day his profit should be astronomical. If you cap him at not more than 10% of is average peer than you just lost the best doctor in the world. The same thing is true for a hospital.



When your product determines wether a person lives or dies and wether they will be able to get relief from mind numbing pain you have the ability to take from them whatever you want in exchange. That is why medicine should not be for profit.

Only if your the sole provider or they are not willing to shop around.

If there is true and functional composition thats impossible.


edit on 7-7-2018 by DanDanDat because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 7 2018 @ 10:48 PM
link   
a reply to: DanDanDat

It doesn't matter how good the doctor is if no one can afford to see him without giving up their life savings.

Are you calling all government jobs slavery? Are you saying doctors should be allowed to hold lives ransom to get whatever they can force people to pay? Are you saying it's acceptable for doctors to force people to suffer a lifetime of extreme pain or accept a lifetime of debt?

Cause that's what your way of seeing things allows and says.



posted on Jul, 7 2018 @ 10:50 PM
link   
a reply to: DanDanDat

There never is true competition when your product is a sure sell people have no choice but to buy.



posted on Jul, 7 2018 @ 11:04 PM
link   

originally posted by: Puppylove
a reply to: DanDanDat

It doesn't matter how good the doctor is if no one can afford to see him without giving up their life savings.

Are you calling all government jobs slavery? Are you saying doctors should be allowed to hold lives ransom to get whatever they can force people to pay? Are you saying it's acceptable for doctors to force people to suffer a lifetime of extreme pain or accept a lifetime of debt?

Cause that's what your way of seeing things allows and says.


If "no one" can afford to see a particular doctor than said doctor is going to be a pore pore man ... if no one sees him he makes no profit.

What you really mean to say is that it's not fair that rich people can afford the most expensive doctors while the rest of us have to make do with the doctors we can afford.

Yup that's not fair... I completely agree. But you don't fix that inequity by forcing doctors to be slave labor and fixing their ability to turn a profit equal to the means of our poorest. You fix that problem by elevating our poorest; yes this could involve a reasonable administered single payer system.

Also keep in mind a disease is what forces people to suffer a lifetime of extreme pain ... even if a doctor flat out refuses to work on you (even if you can afford it) he is not causing you any pain. You do not, should not, be able to force people to take action on your behalf if they do not want to ... for any reason including profit. Your self proclaimed human rights to medical care can not come at the expense of another persons freedom.



posted on Jul, 7 2018 @ 11:05 PM
link   

originally posted by: Puppylove
a reply to: DanDanDat

There never is true competition when your product is a sure sell people have no choice but to buy.


Only if your the sole provider.

Even with a sure sell if there is other providers there will be competition.



posted on Jul, 7 2018 @ 11:14 PM
link   
a reply to: DanDanDat

Not like you are thinking. Free market will never make medical care affordable. There is simply more profit to be made by pretending to compete like coke and pepsi than actually competing. Doctors and medical services are too low in supply and too high in demand for them to have any need to really undersell each other.
edit on 7/7/2018 by Puppylove because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 7 2018 @ 11:30 PM
link   

originally posted by: Puppylove
a reply to: DanDanDat

Not like you are thinking. Free market will never make medical care affordable. There is simply more profit to be made by pretending to compete like coke and pepsi than actually competing. Doctors and medical services are too low in supply and too high in demand for them to have any need to really undersell each other.


Not like im thinking or anything.... what ever that means.

But I think you just discovered a problem that can be solved "Doctors and medical services are too low in supply"

Now we can solve this problem by enslaving this low supply of doctors ... as you would suggest ... it is after all a human right that they work for us with no profit despite their own freedoms.

Or we could find ways to increase the supply of doctors.

I'll go with the second opinion. I don't think much but when I do its unusual in support of freedom.



posted on Jul, 8 2018 @ 05:12 AM
link   
a reply to: Cabin

Because people have a choice some don't want insurance,so they shouldn't be burdened with a socialist program,some like making their own choice,not all are brainwashed liberals



new topics

top topics



 
10
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in

join