what happened to the tsingle payer option?

Forums: Health Insurance
Email this Topic • Print this Page

If a single payer option had been adopted in the first place, then there would not have been affordability issues for us 99% hard working, over taxed serfs of the 1% plutocrats; of which, the health insurance companies fall under.

Topic Stats
Top Replies
Link to this Topic

Type: Discussion • Score: 4 • Views: 814 • Replies: 10

No top replies

What happened to it? The Republicans happened to it. And Obama ended up adopting a version of a plan originally proposed by the far right Heritage Foundation that provided the basis for Romneycare in MA, and essentially left our healthcare system in the hands of the private sector which have been raping us financially for decades. And the Republicans hate that plan too.Which is shwy the US healthcare system costs twice as much per capita as the different versions of single-payer systems that every other major country in the world uses.

1 Reply

@mikric12,

mikric12 wrote:

what happened to the tsingle payer option?

Look for it in Clintoncare.

0 Replies

@mikric12,

Montery Jack is right because as we all know not a single Democrat EVER took a dime from the insurance, hospital, or medical lobbies.

The top three best comedy writing in history:
1. Your Show of Shows
2. Seinfeld
3. A2k "expert" responses

Please, Please, Please guys -- the others are gone so DON'T YOU GUYS EVER CHANGE!!!

0 Replies

@mikric12,

Quote:

what happened to the tsingle payer option?

Candidate Obama never wanted it in the first place, but put it in his platform under pressue from Hillary Clinton's and John Edwards's primary voters.

Once elected, president Obama negotiated with himself, anticipating legislative pressure from Republicans. He dropped the public option before even starting to negotiate with Republicans, in hopes of getting a few of them to vote for his health reform. That, of course, didn't happen. Obamacare, watered down as Obama had wanted it to be in the first place, got enacted in a strictly party-line vote.

(In other words, I think Monterrey Jack is too easy on Obama. Obama pretty much got the reform he had always wanted.)

1 Reply

@MontereyJack,

MontereyJack wrote:

the different versions of single-payer systems that every other major country in the world uses.

Every other major country in the world does not use a version of single payer.

The UK, for example, uses a system where the government owns the hospitals, and most doctors and nurses are government employees.

Germany has a system that somewhat resembles an Obamacare exchange, except all the competing plans are not-for-profit.

A good number of countries copy the German or UK model for their health insurance.

0 Replies

@Thomas,

Thomas wrote:

He dropped the public option before even starting to negotiate with Republicans, in hopes of getting a few of them to vote for his health reform.

I know you didn't say that the Public Option is single payer, but since so many on the Left insist on believing that it is, it should be pointed out that the Public Option is nothing of the sort.

A single-payer system is where everyone's medical bills are paid for by the taxpayers.

The Public Option is a normal health insurance plan where medical bills are covered by the premiums that people pay when they buy their insurance. The only difference between the Public Option and any other insurance policy is that the government plays an administrative role in setting it up and operating it.

More importantly, Obama did NOT drop the Public Option! Why in the world does everyone persist in thinking that he did?

The only thing that was dropped was the name. The Public Option is alive and well under its new name: The Multi-State Plan.

http://www.opm.gov/healthcare-insurance/multi-state-plan-program/

http://www.opm.gov/healthcare-insurance/multi-state-plan-program/opm-multi-state-plan-program-fact-sheet/

0 Replies

oralloy, every country's single payer plan is different, but they all fit under that rubric, including the UK and Germany. And they all cost far less than our jury-rigged system.

wikipedia:

Quote:

Single-payer health care is a system in which the government, rather than private insurers, pays for all health care costs.[1] Single-payer systems may contract for healthcare services from private organizations (as is the case in Canada) or may own and employ healthcare resources and personnel (as is the case in the United Kingdom). The term "single-payer" thus only describes the funding mechanism—referring to health care financed by a single public body from a single fund—and does not specify the type of delivery, or for whom doctors work. Although the fund holder is usually the state, some forms of single-payer use a mixed public-private system.

1 Reply

@MontereyJack,

MontereyJack wrote:

oralloy, every country's single payer plan is different, but they all fit under that rubric, including the UK and Germany.

Germany uses a system where people buy their own insurance. That is as far from a single payer system as one can get.

wikipedia wrote:

Single-payer health care is a system in which the government, rather than private insurers, pays for all health care costs.[1] Single-payer systems may contract for healthcare services from private organizations (as is the case in Canada) or may own and employ healthcare resources and personnel (as is the case in the United Kingdom). The term "single-payer" thus only describes the funding mechanism--referring to health care financed by a single public body from a single fund--and does not specify the type of delivery, or for whom doctors work. Although the fund holder is usually the state, some forms of single-payer use a mixed public-private system.

That Wikipedia author is goofy and incompetent. The term "single payer" refers only to systems where the government pays medical bills out of taxpayer funds.

But even if that Wikipedia author were actually correct, Germany and all nations that base their systems on the German model would still not count as single-payer systems.

0 Replies

You're the goofy one, oralloy. Your definition doesn't agree with how the rest of the world defines it. And the rest of the world wins.

1 Reply

@MontereyJack,

MontereyJack wrote:

You're the goofy one, oralloy.

Nah. I'm the one who points out reality even when the Left wishes to deny reality.

MontereyJack wrote:

Your definition doesn't agree with how the rest of the world defines it.

That is incorrect. The rest of the world uses the term "single payer" as the name for the specific style of system used in Canada.

MontereyJack wrote:

And the rest of the world wins.

When it comes to defining a term, indeed we do.

0 Replies

what happened to the tsingle payer option?

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know