SpaceHey Forum Topic

profile picture

Posted by Macky

posted
updated

Forum: News and Politics

View Macky's Topics

View Macky's Profile

Report Topic

Healthcare in the US

What is everyone's position on the current healthcare problem in the US? Do you support a public option, universal healthcare, complete privatization, or is medicare for all a globalist plot to undermine western civilization through communism (sarcasm)? Explain why in the comments.

12 Replies

Sort Replies:

Reply by Soy Boy LaCroix

posted
updated

I’m not super well read on the finer points of its operation in practice, but if one supports the idea of the public option as a way to moderate between public and private healthcare coverage, I would urge folks to rethink that position. Consider the effects that a public option would feel as the coverage of last resort (especially if insurance companies start dropping patients with pre-existing conditions which are no longer profitable, or whatever), leading to the overloading and undermining of healthcare services which the public option would provide access for. This could happen quickly or slowly, but in terms of maintaining stable healthcare, could potentially leave patients right back where they started if this dynamic were used as propaganda against the “inefficiencies” of a public option, when in reality it’s been stymied by corporate interest and the lack of full financial support by the federal government.


By contrast, universal healthcare/a comprehensive national health service (with supplemental private insurance to assist individuals with rare conditions or ailments) makes more sense as a way to ensure that there’s no competition and thus no incentive to undercut people’s access (and right) to free healthcare. So long as there’s the political will to maintain the system by the legislature, it simply makes more sense if the state is meant to value the health and well-being of its citizens and residents over profit (a big if in the United States, given the stranglehold the insurance industry has over both political parties 👀). 

I’m likely oversimplifying, but this is the dynamic I’ve had outlined while volunteering for Medicare For All advocacy the last couple of years. However, there is no argument for medical “choice” made on Earth which isn’t total hokum, IMO. It just leads to decent healthcare only being affordable to those with the means to afford insurance or pay out of pocket, surprise surprise. I’m definitely down to hear the perspectives of medical professionals on this issue, too.


Report Reply

Reply by xX emo_walsh Xx

posted

Yes because we all know claiming something as a human right automatically makes it abundant and high quality.


Report Reply

Reply by xX emo_walsh Xx

posted

Sure sure I’m agreeing with you. When a bunch of people get together and vote for something, it pops out of thin air. 


Like if we voted for everyone to have a car, everyone will just have a car they will rain down from the sky for us because we did the smart and caring thing and voted it into existence.


Report Reply

Reply by xX emo_walsh Xx

posted
updated

A lot of assumptions and insults for someone who hasn’t asked any constructive questions to find out what I actually believe/have studied.


Report Reply

Reply by Quinn

posted

i don't claim to know anything about infrastructure, but i do think it's incredibly stupid people can't have vital procedures due to the price. im a pretty definite leftist, and even i know one of the core libertarian values is the right to "life liberty and property/the pursuit of happiness". doesn't "life" include proper medical treatment?


Report Reply

Reply by xX emo_walsh Xx

posted
updated

Hey sure Quinn that’s a good point. When libertarians talk about liberty, we talk about being in a state of freedom. Not imposing a state of obligation. So libertarians are more concerned with the state of obligation that is created when something like medical care treatment is mandated to be free. 


The reason this is concerning to us is because it creates a state in which there is less incentive for people to engage in an efficient creation of supply, thus creating a state in which there is less supply relative to healthcare demand. A worse situation then when people did have to pay for it. 

A libertarian would consider the stagnation, reduction in supply, and reduction in quality produced by obligating we offer care for $0 a worse state then one in which we allow individuals to be incentivized to create supply, and thus respond to people’s healthcare demand efficiently via price signals.


Report Reply

Reply by xX emo_walsh Xx

posted
updated

In summery the libertarian argument here is,


Libertarians seek to maximize a state of freedom,
Dictating healthcare as a right imposes a state of enforced obligation, thus dictating healthcare as a right is counter to maximizing a state of freedom.

The underlying reason why we would care about this is,

Imposing a state of freedom creates an environment in which producers are best able to gauge demand, this allows for the market to find what kinds of products/procedures/professionals need to exist where depending on demand, thus reducing possibilities of shortages/surplus and allowing individuals to impose new ways of driving down actual health care cost through market competition and responding to market demand.

Aka imposing a state of freedom results in the best existence of supply vs demand relationship, overall increasing people’s access to said supply.


Report Reply

Reply by xX emo_walsh Xx

posted
updated

Another way to look at this Quinn may be as follows,


Declaring something a human right makes it not responsive to market signals,

Things that are not responsive to market signals are suboptimal resulting in waste and stagnation compared to things that are responsive to market signals

Declaring healthcare a human right makes the existence of healthcare suboptimal in comparison to actual demand, making the actual access to it vs actual cost worse off then in free market conditions.


Report Reply

Reply by Forrest

posted

After living in Canada for 5 years, I think anyone who talks shit about Universal Healthcare is an absolute moron.

The slightly higher taxes are worth it for me, my loved ones, and my neighbors to not have to choose between necessary medical care vs. buying food and paying bills. If we held the ultra rich accountable for paying their fair share in taxes, we'd be able to easily fund a robust national healthcare system.


Report Reply

Reply by xX emo_walsh Xx

posted

Great response Forrest


Report Reply

Reply by umbrykane

posted

I'm semi against UHC, as of how the current money system is ran (Pretty much the more you do to someone the more money you get paid). I've been to medical school and listen to other people in the field talking about how they give people the wrong diagnosis just to make them come back again and again, or giving them placebos.  We would need to find a way to make money itself not as important so people will be in the field to help people and not to make money (For example, being a teacher is a pretty thankless job and teachers dont get paid shit for what they deal with. If you become a teacher its because you have that passion, its never really for the pay check).


Anyways here are my own personal experiences with Medicare vs Paid insurance plans.  When i was a child, my mom had me on medi, i had horrible dental hygine habits, often brushing my teeth maybe a few times a month, if my teeth were lucky. Guess what, I never had a cavity~. My mom though, would brush and floss twice a day, always had cavities every time we went to the dentist. Doctors do NOT get paid as much for a medi patient than an insurance patient (I just googled this).

Last year i had BCBS as my insurance, I applied for Medi when i found out i was pregnant just because i was told to apply for it. So here's a timeline rather than explain it:

march: 26th - Found out i was pregnant

April 11ish - Had first ultrasound. They found a cyst on my ovary (this is important) 

August - I quit the job i was at because it wasn't a good environment for being pregnant (it was stressful and wasnt climate control, it was an okay job before i was pregnant)

September beginnning- They tell me the cyst has gotten bigger and wants an expert to look at it

September ending - The expert wants me to have surgery on the cyst, and tells me how important for me to have it ASAP because of how big it was

Ocotober Beginning - They have alerted me that i have medicare when i ask if they have some type of programs to help pay for my bills. They reimburse the money we've paid.

October ending - The cyst is no longer that much of a concern and its not as big as they believed it was

November 13th - I go into early labor and have Hunter on the 14th

January 28th - I get a IUD put in but the kind i wanted could have effects if i have a cyst. I'm told the cyst no longer exists, although the lady checking out my ovaries said she couldnt get a good view of my ovary or the cyst...but for some reason it also no longer exists.

Whehter i have a cyst or not, i dont even know anymore. But yeah, something is going to have to change in either the medical or the financial situation here in the USA before UHC becomes a thing. I mean im for it, but i feel it would hurt more people than help


Report Reply

Reply by Macky

posted
updated

I think you make a pretty valid point. I'm going to explain how only Universal Healthcare wont actually solve the current problems, but rather it's a variation of social and economic factors that contribute the declination of people's mental health.

"...how they give people the wrong diagnosis just to make them come back
again and again, or giving them placebos."

Healthcare in it's current state, it's main goal is to make a profit. Insurances companies wants to maximize profits at any means necessary and usually at the expense of the people seeking help. What would happen if we had a socialized system of healthcare? Insurances companies would seize to exist and the profit motive would be gone, and since profiteering of people's suffering wouldn't exist anymore, then there wouldn't be an incentive to continue the suffering of patients. The profit motive in of itself rewards the continual suffering in a private healthcare system, and removing that motive the main goal would be to genuinely help people.

I'm not a sociologist, so I'm not super well versed in the social and economic aspects of mental health, but I did watch a video that explains how the current system breeds and social environment is a breeding ground for mental illness.

cw: talk of suicide, mental health, and addiction
https://youtu.be/rPeBEcsmWTY


Report Reply