Neat and to the Point: Healthcare

[Totally Committed]

TC

[Totally Committed]

1. Come on, this is anonymous, and you know you have an opinion!

How about an all-volunteer medical establishment? Free med school for anyone who agrees to treat everyone for a set salary for 20 years.

Or universal, and not-for-profit across the board?


TC

[Totally Committed]

2. kick

TC

[iamjoy]

3. Universal, For Profit

Work with the medical and insurance industries, not against them. Tighter regulations on insurance companies, possibly even a government review panel for appeals (of denied claims).

[mikehiggins]

4. Give me a break

Corporations faced with bottom line decisions always go for the buck.

If the insurance and medical industries cared about the public first there wouldn't be many millions of US citizens with no medical coverage, and millions more faced with a system that does everything in its power to keep from paying out legitimate fees.

Tighten regulations? Who exactly is going to do that? Al Gonzalez or Condi Rice?

You really have to, like Ayn Rand used to say, check your premises.

[iamjoy]

5. Ayn Rand Would Not Favor Universal HealthCare

certainly not single payer. Let the market sort it out, right? No government imposition on us, forcing Americans to have healthcare.

Of course, you bring up a good point - should we trust the people who are supposed to be regulating the industry? But then, if we move to a single payer system we're still going to have the Ron Pauls and Alberto Gonzalez types making decisions on it. Remember how much Republicans love cutting funding for current social services to help fund tax breaks for millionaires. Do you think that would change? Starving the beast, they call it.

[MannyGoldstein]

6. Would Ayn Rand Want Us To Pay Twice As Much For A Worse Product?

Every other industrialized country (except Switzerland) has some variation of single payer/Medicare for All. In every instance, it produces better medical outcomes. In every instance, it costs far less per person - typically half as much.

Even in the US, it costs the same for Medicare to cover each person 65-and-older as it costs to cover each person under 65 with private insurance. That is staggering. The 65-and-older crowd is far more likely to need care, yet, thanks to single-payer, they're covered for roughly the same cost as folks who rarely need substantial care.

[Stinky The Clown]

8. You can't be serious

By law, corporations are required to maximize profits for their owners.

That is counter to good health care decision making.

Remove profit and layers of fat from the system and you get single payer. Better care at less cost.

[flpoljunkie]

7. Medicare for all. Link below to Jane Bryant Quinn column regarding same.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=3409792&mesg_id=3409792

[Czolgosz]

9. Unquestionably, universal single-payer not-for-profit is the answer, but we can't get from here to

there is a single step (I'm ready to go there in a single step, but there simply isn't the public will notwithstanding our shared passion for the idea). There has to be intermediary steps.

We ought to fight for universal single-payer not-for-profit (Kucinich's plan), but we ought not fight against models that offer universal care through a limited and regulated number of payers which includes both not-for-profit and for-profit (Edwards's plan) or expansion that falls short of universality for CHIP and Medicare combined with further regulation of for-profit private insurers (suggested by Hillary and Obama).

[welshTerrier2]

10. we need more doctors

every year, thousands of applicants fail to get accepted into medical schools. many of these applicants are more than qualified and have excellent grades and exam scores. with proper federal programs and policies, the number of slots in medical schools could be expanded. the country clearly needs more doctors. we hear plenty of talk about "free markets" but this market is unnecessarily restrictive to the detriment of the nation's health.

we especially need more general practitioners and we especially need them in rural and remote areas. this is not a call for socialized medicine but it does recognize that the government has a role to play in how medical care is delivered, and not delivered, to the American people.

In the poll, I voted for option one.