There are already talks of a vaccine-passport, which are opposed by the World Health Organization (W. H. O.) & American Civil Liberties Union (A. C. L. U.).www.who.int/.../interim-position-paper-considerations-regarding-proof-of-covid-19-vaccination-for-international-travellerswww.aclu.org/.../www.aclu.org/.../Are also Americans ready for the possibility of a national-I. D. (tied to your medical-info) to accompany such a proposal?
Scroll Down to Read Other Opinions
If you can't answer this question, then you should concede that it is a bad idea.
@pokerbot And who pays the taxes?
Taxpayers. The same taxpayers currently being held to ransom by medical insurance.
@pokerbot As a taxpayer, why should I be forced to pay for someone else's health insurance?As a private citizen, I can shop for the health care insurance that I want and select the best product with the most competitive rate. Under Obamacare, I was forced to get maternity coverage - and I'm a 66 year old single male.
Let's see, you paid off the banks to the tune of billions, now you don't want to pay for something that would actually help Joe Public?
@pokerbot Who said that I wanted to bail out the banks? You also did not directly answer the question that I asked.
Turns out you don't get to choose how your tax dollars are spent, you just cough up or go to jail. Successive governments have used your tax dollars to bail out the banks. Yet here you are bitching about the terrifying prospect of free healthcare? I don't know why I bother arguing with you.
@pokerbot 1. I never sad the prospect was terrifying; that is a word that you chose and have tried to pin in me. That is a childish way of "discussing" this matter.2. My argument is that the government should do as little as necessary and leave us to be responsible for ourselves, taxing us to raise revenues only to do what is the minimum necessary.3. I do not think it is the responsibility of government to provide everything for us that we deem necessary.I do not wish to continue a conversation with you since you are falsely suggesting that I hold thoughts or sentiments which you then want to ridicule. Good bye.
And Bernie Sanders is a senile commie:https://youtu.be/K2d3DMC6qyg
Nice!And let's not forget the spectacular performance providing healthcare-services via Veterans' Affairs!https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=azqKG6zqAbU
@N192K001 The VA makes a lot of sense to me along with Medicaid. I'm an iterative type of person. I like improving things slowly. Low-risk, you know. I would love national healthcare for Americans but I don't see the federal government's policies as a viable way to do this.
If they can make the VA work well, for example, and in a cost-effective way, then that's a start to persuading me that national healthcare is possible in the US without horrible repercussions.
Yeah, I would agree: IF the Federal-government were able to make it feasible, then sure! IF Washington can make the V. A. serve the veterans' needs in an acceptable, high-quality, but low-cost way, then it's just a matter of scaling-upward, while trying to maintain standards.Whatever the case, the current system is broken. Hopefully, we can find a better way in due time.
"On 24 June 2020, China approved the CanSino vaccine... On 11 August 2020, Russia announced the approval... The Pfizer–BioNTech partnership submitted an EUA request to the FDA for the mRNA vaccine BNT162b2 (active ingredient tozinameran) on 20 November 2020."The Pfizer–BioNTech vaccine was developed by Turkish immigrants in Germany, and the Chinese vaccine is as good as a flu vaccine, it's just not as good as the others.
China and Russia? 🤣🤣🤣What a crock of bullshit.Riiiiiiiight... like they have any checks for safety and efficacy. Their approval process is about 5 minutes and into the arms of its citizens it goes. Oh... 100,000 died before they found out they were injecting poison? Who cares... we have plenty more people where that came from says China and Russia. Between that and the deep state FDA slow walk approval for political purposes to hurt President Trump, it explains the whole thing.NEWS FLASH... PFIZER IS AN ****American**** COMPANY.
BioNTech, which developed the vaccine, is a German company. (And you're just making up horror stories about China and Russia, because you think they couldn't possibly have done anything as well as the US.)
Exactly! You've asked the right question few seem to ask.The answer? Insurance-companies & the healthcare-providers' list of (INSANE!) prices: the chargemaster.www.reuters.com/.../us-health-listprices-cancer-idUSKBN1ZF2W4So that insurance-companies can brag about giving discounts, providers make outrageous prices for the just to slash. But those without insurance (or a membership to a discount-program) end-up paying those ridiculously-murderous prices.Ironically, eradicating the insurance-companies may actually fix the problem in the long-run. Of course, public generally won't accept it, nor would politicians & lobbyists.
The ridiculous bills are because of a positive feedback loop of insurance companies taking a percentage of the premiums, which only increases with higher premiums (and they love to get discounts from the hospitals, so their prices get inflated).It is within the power of a government to intervene on the people's behalf. But politicians will happily forego that power in exchange for money. (See Medicare part D, iirc.)
@goaded And no surprise, the insurance-industry is outspent only by the pharmaceuticals in lobbying Wahsington, even spending almost 2x that of the hospitals & nursing-homes.www.investopedia.com/.../Hence, I have great doubts as to whether this issue will be fixed anytime in the foreseeable future. Unless, something BIG & utterly drastic were to happen. But of course, I'd also dread whatever that thing would ever have to be.
@N192K001 I guess we'll see if it has to be bigger than a year long pandemic.
Excellent valid opinions @N192K001 and @goaged. I did not mean to exclude Insurance from this as if they have no role to play. Like I said, its a large cartel. Even the Urgent Care Centers... Who creates them. Who creates the need for them. Another piece of this fraud.
Oops... Typo. @goaded
Haven’t you ever listened to any open forum dialogues on healthcare? You will hear what CanadiansHave to say! Better yet if you have a illness, Go to a site where others are and you’ll see many fromAll over the world. Yes I’m on the Epilepsy one
I saw exactly that second picture's argument on here, just a couple of days ago.
its somewhat childish to say "everyone else is doing it so we should too" and by that standard america already has a better universal healthcare plan than most of those places... its called medicare. yes that's a universal healthcare plan. most of the countries that you can name don't have universal healthcare, they have a limited public option with extreme restrictions and it isn't very good.
@007kingifrit In every other nation of the world that has adopted a universal scheme, it has worked. People like it, and would never tolerate any politician who proposed to scrap it (that would be the end of their political career).
this is largely untrue. most countries are struggling to maintain these programs. they have lower quality of care, higher wait times, and higher taxesmost importantly Europe will lose its universal healthcare in the next 10 years as your birth rates are too low, you can't afford to maintain them with no young people to tax
It's up there with "why would you vote not to have a union that your employer is encouraging you to have?" (VW in WV, iirc.) (Not really, it was in Tennessee.)
@goaded from reading a few of the answers, they seem to think of it as a replacement for private health services rather than an addition to.
Yes. That would be single-payer, but it's not the only game in town. Just a public option with subsidies would be an improvement on what they have now. Of course, a lot of peoples' salaries depend on not understanding that (or that medical bankruptcies are almost unique to the US among developed nations).(Another fun argument is "why should the doctors have to work for nothing?".)
@goaded it's bizarre
And herein lies the problem!
Germany's system is based on for-profit insurance companies, doctors' practices and hospitals. It can work.
Absolutely right! Except for everywhere where it has, of course.en.wikipedia.org/.../List_of_countries_with_universal_health_care
... No. It hasn't.Wiki is not that trustworthy, vet it before posting it.What you're pointing at is a variety of mixed payer healthcare systems and/or inferior healthcare.Unlike "universal" healthcare, mixed payer actually works and treats people effectively.Tribal leftist freaks like to call these systems "universal" when really, in places like Australia for example, it's a public option and private options as well as supplemental private care for all the rarer obscure treatments. And that's reason why universal care never works, because there's those obscure, rare, expensive treatments with limited availability. Such things can't be provided universally, which means the whole idea of universal care is nonsense outside of a post-scarcity sci-fi utopia.Anywhere "universal" care has been tried, it has dragged down the standard of care and relied on health tourism to other countries for the wealthier people to pay for their expensive rare treatments.So it's not even really "universal" care, only within a country would it be "universal", but that framing neglects to mention that it relies on private care outside the country to meet the needs of many citizens.There is no universal healthcare.There's only people who try to co-opt the idea of public option into their ideology as "universal".And there's places that are "universal" ... except for all the private care that comes from elsewhere.
Oh, so you want to redefine "universal health care" as something other than "health care that is accessible to everybody"?Treating very rare conditions doesn't cost very much because they're very rare, and almost everybody is paying into the system.
Universal healthcare has always meant public only. But the only people who don’t use that are tribal leftists. Who want to blur public payer and mixed payer in order to shoehorn in a public payer system.No. You misunderstand. It’s not that the condition is rare, it’s that the *treatment* is rare and/or expensive regardless of how rare the condition is. The problem is that you can’t decide who gets what treatment.Eg when Canada was using public only, you would have to wait for two years for a simple MRI of a knee while the condition gets worse. iirc the instance I’m thinking of correctly.Canada ruled it was a human rights violation to have strictly public healthcare. So anyone acting like Canada is an example of the “universal” system is full of it. They flat out scrapped that in favor of mixed payer.
"Universal healthcare has always meant public only."Funny, because "Germany has a universal multi-payer health care system paid for by a combination of statutory health insurance (Gesetzliche Krankenversicherung) and private health insurance (Private Krankenversicherung)."en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Healthcare_in_GermanyIt works really well, and it's grown from the oldest social health care system in the world. (1834.)If you're happy that that sort of system works best, why aren't Republicans proposing that as a reasonable alternative to single payer, rather than dismissing any attempts to ensure everyone has access to health care as "socialism!"?
@goaded I like mixed-payer systems, so we don't even disagree about that. I like it, but calling it universal is misleading, and I'm going to leave it at that since we're just arguing about that semantic games tribalists play at this point and not anything substantive." why aren't Republicans proposing that as a reasonable alternative to single payer"Because they're weak and feckless for the most part. All they do is tap the brakes on Democrat insanity, but never propose anything bold. Trump was the only one who inspired any real action. Most Republican politicians are purely reactive.
Well, I don't agree that single-payer can't work, but my experiences with the German health care system have been generally positive. What makes a health care system "universal", though, is that it's universal coverage, not the details of how it's funded."... ensure that all people can use health services, while being protected against financial hardship associated with paying for them.In this report, the World Health Organization maps out what countries can do to modify their financing systems so they can move more quickly towards this goal - universal coverage..."https://www.who.int/whr/2010/en/Doing what is done in most developed countries is not "Democratic insanity", and Republicans haven't been just tapping the breaks, they've removed the wheels and put sugar in the fuel tank of government. As far as they're concerned, the only direction the government is allowed to go is reducing taxes and regulations.Opposing single-payer by proposing a system of insurance companies and individual mandates would be "tapping the brakes". But that was Republicans in 1993 (some co-sponsors of that bill voted against the ACA, which was basically the same thing).No-one can negotiate with a party that won't give a single vote to something unless all their representatives are happy with it.
@goaded “Doing what is done in most developed countries is not "Democratic insanity"”They don’t necessarily want to do what is done in most countries, and where they do that’s not necessarily a good thing. Most countries don’t have a bill of rights for example. Most of what they want and do does genuinely suck, regardless of how many other countries do or don’t do the same things. That’s what I mean my their insanity.“No-one can negotiate with a party that won't give a single vote to something unless all their representatives are happy with it.”Hence why I called them insane.Really it’s just the corporate establishment uniparty, and like 12 politicians out of the 500+ representatives in congress that are decent people.
I'm reliably assured by right wingers that universal health care is not socialism.Why do so many Americans think sosialisme is a bad thing? ↗
Do you want socialism?
Sorry, I missed your response. I think universal health care is a very good thing that relieves people of a lot of stress and allows people to move jobs or start businesses more easily. Nobody goes bankrupt from medical bills in countries with universal health care.It is not socialism.
Right so we disagree on health care, that’s ok.But as a separate question, do you want socialism?
In a democracy? Yes. As a dictatorship or one party system, hell, no!