facepalm
Murica Not Need Medicare Though.
Discussion
The point is financial profit and control over the people.
You get it!
lol yea lives are free. With more money they can afford more “human capital”. Why make less money ha.
UnitedHealth is the largest health insurance company in the US with 28% of the market. The company’s full-year profit sank 36% to $14.4 billion in 2024 after climbing every year for nearly a decade.
Sank 36%......
To $14,400,000,000
.
There is still the other 72% of the market.
Wow! They should fire the CEO !!!! Oh, wait……
Always has been, always will be. America sucks
Need insurance? Work for less money.
Cruelty is the point. They want those they deem unworthy to suffer. They don’t actually care about the budget. There’s no logic behind their ideology. It’s just pure selfishness and hate.
100% republicans feel more superior when they see others suffering. They want a large poor population to manipulate and extort as much as they can.
And the crazy part is how many poor republicans there are. The propaganda/brainwashing effectiveness is honestly staggering. They’ve been getting a huge chunk of voters to vote against their own best interest for ages. By spreading fear and confusion and hate via “culture war” bs as a means to distract from the real policy goals: enriching the 1% at the expense of everyone else.
It's dixiecrats voting to remove public pools under the guise of fiscal conservatism all over again.
Money is the point. All that money spent on healthcare goes into somebody's pocket. They don't want people to spend less, they want them to spend more.
Of course there is a logical argument against single-payer healthcare. Yes, Medicare for all would be much less expensive than our current disaster of a system...for the average person. However, the current system works great for the very rich and terribly for everyone else. Hence, no change.
The argument used by rich Republicans (which poor Republicans fall for):
The lower-classes must needlessly have their healthcare tied to employment to ensure their subservience.
Yes. It’s selfishness. They don’t want to pay for anyone else’s care, or anything else. They also feel they can force you to live by their rules. They don’t accept collective action on a large scale. They don’t trust people. Ultimately, their behavior is driven by fear.
“We believe it’s logical to continue overcharging customers and remain filthy rich while lobbying against universal healthcare and fighting it tooth and nail.”
— Hospitals, Doctors, Pharmaceutical Companies, and Insurance Companies
You got the order wrong, if we’re talking most egregious offenders first.
Money is the point. You don’t buy a fifth yacht if you’re not stealing from the poor
Do you know how many insurance companies would go out of business?
oh no
Sadly, this is the answer. They make huge amounts of money and pay off, er, I mean donate to politicians and get their way more often than not.
There are lots of businesses tied to the current system also. It would wreck the economy even if it's the right thing to do.
all of them! wouldnt it be great?
Not that many, a couple would, but the rest would just start offering higher quality healthcare than the publicly funded healthcare and they’d have to do it at cheaper prices.
And i get it. Insurance companies are scum, but there would need to be a significant plan to keep people employed in a single payer system.
Millions of people work in the insurance and healthcare billing industry. United health alone has like 400,000 employees.
If you just evaporated all of those positions with legislation you would need a plan to not crater the economy in the process.
This isn't an argument against single payer, because it's absolutely the way to go, but the transition would be much more painful than many imagine if not managed closely.
but then how are the big health care providers supposed to pad the pockets of government officials?
Can’t have that in the US because then brown people will benefit.
Except that not having it helps keep the poor people poor and reliant on shitty jobs. If you are in the cult, that is all that matters. Until their own healthcare gets taken away
That’s the beautiful thing about the good old United States of America. You have the freedom to choose to the worst possible option for everyone. Keep em poor! Yeehaw!
/s
Not if you make a ton of money from the current system and then buy politicians to ensure it doesn’t change.
Republicans are all fucking idiots. They contribute jack shit to society.
It would solve -so- many problems.
Medical bankruptcy would disappear.
The economy would grow as a result.
The problem... employees who are tied to an employer for their welfare are not going to strike.
but the think of those poor CEOs! How can they afford their mansions and vacations if they can't drain out the common citizen
As a nurse, I weep every day because of the cruelty inherent in our system. Fuck Republicans, and fuck everyone who didn't vote in 2024. You inflicted this on us, and you deserve no forgiveness.
It’s cheaper but not more profitable. In America we only care about profits
It’s cheaper which means less profits for the uber rich and greedy.
If everyone has what they have, how do they pretend to be superior?
Greed and cruelty. There, that’s the logical argument.
SOCIALISM!!!!! lol
There is no logical argument against universal healthcare.
Of course not. Hatred isn't logical.
It is, however, the only reason conservatives do pretty much anything.
I don’t understand how they can take away something we’ve paid for our entire lives! Every paycheck f-ed in the ass and not in a fun way.
Yeah but people.I dont like will get it too /s
That's exactly why
This is exactly why we don't have it.
Everyone knows real freedom is paying monthly premiums so when you actually do need medical care you can be surprised on what you’re still on the hook for!
The corps don’t want cheaper.
Logic = profit for health care compaies and pharma companies, and killing off more citizens.
But the death panels /s
Profit, selfishness and cruelty are the only reasons. That and the brainwashing that made them believe the American healthcare system is the best in the world, when they can't even access it without bankrupting themselves.
But what will the poor insurance companies do?!?!
America ……… Logical argument? Why would you think this is a thing.
Now, hate motivated, yup, that we know.
But it doesn’t give subsidies to shareholders
Pharmaceuticals, Health, Insurance are all in the top 5 lobbying. The math isn’t difficult.
There is logic: The rich can only get richer at the expense of the poor. America’s economic system isn’t capitalist, it’s parasitic.
Cruelty and greed
It being more expensive IS the logical argument.
It’s not about logic. It’s about greed.
Der SOCIALISM. Free Healthcare leads to death panels and eventually the mass murder of millions that's what socialism does.
/s
Conservatives: but what about illogical arguments we have plenty of those...
But have you considered the bonuses for CEOs and profits for shareholders? When will someone think of the CEOs? /S
Not as much as billionaires need tax breaks
It wouldn’t generate profits
Can't make billions in profit on single payer. How would the ceos pay for their yachts?
You’re gonna get what you pay for just like rolling up at a micky D’s you want fries with that hemorrhoid surgery !!
Studies also show that the vast majority of Americans want conscientious gun laws, but that ain’t happening either. Your population consistently voted for people who don’t want what the majority of people want.
It’s not just about cost, it’s about principle.
When you disconnect benefits from work, you create a system where the burden falls on those who contribute, while others can benefit without doing the same.
Over time, that erodes the social contract.
The fundamental objection to universal healthcare isn’t about denying help, it’s about fairness.
Is it fair to ask those who work and pay taxes to carry the weight for those who don’t, regardless of circumstance or effort?
Took my son to the ER in Australia last weekend after he fell and hurt his wrist. X-ray and splint for a buckle fracture. Only took about 90mins and cost us zero dollars.
Logic has nothing to do with it. There are plenty of people in this country who would happily over pay for private insurance is it meant that a person they have never met will go without.
Healthcare is a privilege in Murica, the more money you have the best healthcare you get, if you are broke, don't even think about getting treated.
Gotta go Meta: it only makes sense if your intention is to keep folks healthy and alive.
A bicycle is better than riding a nearly dead horse.
But its not as good as a car.
We don't have a system right now. We have a pyramid scheme of interlaced arbitrary government regulations that create an expensive shit storm.
Yes a UHC of any current design is better than that.
But if you're wiping the slate clean and starting from scratch there are superior option than a UHC. So do those instead.
But, but, BUT IT'S COMMUNISM!!!1ELF! (/s to be sure, as a German I love universal healthcare)
Lobbyists and money. You don’t even need studies to know that it doesn’t work, just look everywheee else in the world.
Alas, "the world" doesn't have nations with 1/3 of a billion people living in them (unless you want to count Communist China and Caste-run India, each of which have over a BILLION people each, and are the OUTLIERS compared to the US AND the rest of the world). If this country had a sound population strategy from the time we took on the 49th and 50th State (if not a generation before then), we wouldn't have this problem of even contemplating "universal health care" in such an overpopulated nation....
Oh yeah the US is the biggest and best and no one can do things as well as they can and if they can’t work it out it just can’t be done 😂
Well, you see, having Universal Healthcare would mean we couldn’t afford more important things like tax cuts for billionaires.
There is no money in the cure, that is all
Medicare is counter to the mandate of culling the population.
Sure there is. The yacht class don't want to lose their power, money or influence. They'd rather see you die.
Profit is the reason!
There is a logical argument against it: they don’t want to because making sure people have healthcare leads to less suffering which means more people well enough to realize that greedy people are scamming them and are the cause of our collective socioeconomic problems.
They need people to be poor sick angry and distracted to maintain their hierarchy.
Income inequality?
Health Insurance and pharmaceuticals are two of America’s most profitable industries. That’s the only reason we don’t have single payer.
Yeah. They have a logical argument. Republicans do not want federal taxes going to help anyone but the wealthy. Local and state taxes are made for that. If a state wants health care to be a priority, they will have to negotiate prices on their own. This means the red states will pay a lot more for health care.
It's not about what is better.
It hasn't been about what is better maybe since the 1970s. Or earlier.
It is about capitalism. America is a for-profit country. It is not about truly caring about what is best for its citizens. You can tell by the people who get voted in.
We Americans don't think this is THAT important. If we did, it would change. But that would start with a society that truly understands civics - how our government works.
But there is too much infighting created by those who control the media. Mainstream media and social media.
Some control the media to make themselves and others richer. Some control social media because they want their country to do better - and their country does better if the US does worse.
It keeps people dependent on jobs they hate and prevents them from starting their own businesses that could compete with their current company.
“But how will we exploit them?” - soon-too-be-luigied CEO
🧸 : 𝚠𝚑𝚒𝚝𝚎 𝚌𝚘𝚗𝚜𝚎𝚛𝚟𝚊𝚝𝚒𝚟𝚎𝚜 𝚍𝚘𝚗'𝚝 𝚠𝚊𝚗𝚝 𝚝𝚘 𝚜𝚑𝚊𝚛𝚎 𝚒𝚝 𝚠𝚒𝚝𝚑 𝚗𝚘𝚗 𝚠𝚑𝚒𝚝𝚎𝚜... 𝙻𝚒𝚝𝚎𝚛𝚊𝚕𝚕𝚢 𝚝𝚑𝚎 𝚘𝚗𝚕𝚢 𝚛𝚎𝚊𝚜𝚘𝚗 𝚝𝚑𝚊𝚝 𝚒𝚝 𝚙𝚘𝚕𝚕𝚜 𝚠𝚎𝚕𝚕 𝚋𝚞𝚝 𝚝𝚑𝚎𝚢 𝚠𝚘𝚗'𝚝 𝚟𝚘𝚝𝚎 𝚏𝚘𝚛 𝚒𝚝.
What studies? I’m all for single-payer but you can’t just say “study after study” and not highlight a single study. You’re not going to convince anyone.
Looking for a reason? Maybe this will begin to provide an answer. https://youtu.be/OH-glqAqw7M?si=l55gdc0pzBTRHGgj
They don’t actually want some people to have healthcare that’s all it is. Racism and classism.
Like the Ferengi says: if there is no profit in it, why do it?
The Ferengi were well developed to truly represent the oligarchs of the world.
If your healthcare is tied your job, you wont go out and protest and risk losing healthcare.
The ones who worship Moloch have cremated care and empathy in exchange for profit. The spell must be broken.
A handful of super-rich people would disagree
Correct, there is no logical argument. Hence all the illogical arguments right-wingers resort to, ranging from "personal responsibility" all the way up to and including "everybody dies, can I interest you in my lord and savior".
Have you heard of the excessive waiting in Canada and the UK? Ignore all the delays and denials we have to go through.
Sure universal healthcare isn’t perfect, but if you currently have health insurance then you wouldn’t be going through that system anyway. You’d be going through the private system which can still exist, it just can’t scam you nearly as bad as it currently does.
They have cheap universal healthcare, it's called gofundme.
Jokes aside, They want people to pay for them, and not pay for anyone else.
Dude must be a commie like Zorhan.
Plenty of logical arguments. Universal healthcare benefits no one. Not the patient, not the hospitals, not the healthcare workers, not the tax payers
You forgot your /s!
You’re welcome.
Medicare yes. We pay for that along with social security. Medicaid, well stop waist and fraud and find a better system
Holy brainwashed, Batman!
lmao
Here's a collection of documents explaining why a free-market solution is preferable to a government-run, single-payer healthcare system.
- The Affordable Care Act has suffered unintended consequences since inception. These consequences include mangled incentives and exploding budgets. Richard Hyman and David Epstein argue that the failures of the Affordable Care Act as well as the failures of our current system could be solved with the implementation of a free-market healthcare system.
- Process efficiency has led to cheaper costs of televisions, microwaves, computers, cell phones, internet service, delivery services, food, transportation, air travel, entertainment, home security, fitness, massages, veterinarian services, and even medical technology (like Lasik) that is not as heavily regulated or controlled by government. This process efficiency is absent in healthcare.
- “There is increasing evidence of the potential for cost- saving technologies (with equivalent or better outcomes) in the management and organization of healthcare to yield substantial productivity gains. But these types of innovations are unlikely to diffuse widely through the healthcare system until there are much stronger incentives to do so.” The required incentives would be available in a true free-market healthcare system.
- The current healthcare market is not competitive. This is evidenced by the fact that hospitals will not tell you a price ahead of time. No competitive industry would dream of getting away with this. A free-market healthcare system would by design increase competition and drive down prices for goods and services.
And here's a study on why those papers are not worth wiping ya arse with. The rest of the civilised world already does it for far cheaper than the failing states. Have longer life expectancy etc.............
A few things to consider:
Spending for health care under single-payer systems is placed against other government objectives and readily falls victim to politicians' continuous urge to campaign on tax reduction. The barebones technology, physical amenities, and queues that excessively low global budgets in single-payer systems inevitably produce compel political forces to hand over the system to ostensibly "more efficient" private market forces, which is code for allowing the quality of the healthcare experience to vary according to the patient's economic circumstance.
And, sure, the low pricing a single-payer system imposes on the system enables society to provide more genuine health care for a given budget than a more costly pluralistic system could, and it also makes universal health insurance coverage more affordable. On the other hand, the extremely low profit margins it generates for health-care providers make single-payer systems less hospitable to innovation in healthcare products and services, as well as in healthcare delivery organization, areas in which the United States excels, sometimes to the point of excess.
Mate, just more excuses, not really reasons. For shit and giggles, compare the tax allocated to medical per person for America, then compare with Australia. We already pay less tax than you allocated to health for a universal system...... no copay or insurance required.......
We spend twice as much and have worse health outcomes. The for profit system seems to be a disaster based on the numbers. If we put a man on the moon and can run the most advanced military we can also run the best healthcare system driven by innovation and making people healthy, not by profits.
The biggest problem with free market healthcare is that the free market will bleed us dry if it can, and when it comes to life and death, it absolutely will bleed us dry.
So sure, elective healthcare might get costs driven down through a free market, but emergency care certainly won't.
A few additional things to consider:
Spending for health care under single-payer systems is placed against other government objectives and readily falls victim to politicians' continuous urge to campaign on tax reduction. The barebones technology, physical amenities, and queues that excessively low global budgets in single-payer systems inevitably produce compel political forces to hand over the system to ostensibly "more efficient" private market forces, which is code for allowing the quality of the healthcare experience to vary according to the patient's economic circumstance.
And, sure, the low pricing a single-payer system imposes on the system enables society to provide more genuine health care for a given budget than a more costly pluralistic system could, and it also makes universal health insurance coverage more affordable. On the other hand, the extremely low profit margins it generates for health-care providers make single-payer systems less hospitable to innovation in healthcare products and services, as well as in healthcare delivery organization, areas in which the United States excels, sometimes to the point of excess.
Last I checked, us excelling in healthcare innovation has more to do with government grants to improve healthcare than it does with high profit margins at hospitals.
Our health outcomes are some of the worst in developed countries. What is it exactly that we excel at with our health delivery organizations?
The barebones technology, physical amenities, and queues that excessively low global budgets in single-payer systems inevitably produce compel political forces to hand over the system to ostensibly "more efficient" private market forces, which is code for allowing the quality of the healthcare experience to vary according to the patient's economic circumstance.
So all the other countries with better health outcomes than us have more barebones technology? What physical amenities are you talking about? Right now, we pay out of our teeth for amenities (and everything else... Some hospitals are charging $28 for a Tylenol).
How does the patient's economic circumstance affect their care quality in a single-payer system? The hospital doesn't know their economic circumstances in any way.
That's not the issue. The problem is that you can't have a free market for health insurance for the same reason we don't have private police and military. The goal of these organizations is to provide security, safety, etc. Those are Government functions.
- Research confirms that the government's intent to eliminate competition has distorted the marketplace. No consumer purchasing goods and services ever complains about too much competition, but they always complain about too little of it.
- https://www.mercatus.org/publications/corporate-welfare/certificate-need-laws
- https://www.nccivitas.org/2011/certificate-of-need-does-it-actually-control-healthcare-costs/
- https://www.researchgate.net/publication/11736030_Effects_of_Regulation_Hospital_Costs_and_Input_Use
- https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/BF00140955
- https://ideas.repec.org/a/tpr/restat/v77y1995i3p416-22.html
- https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/11892757/
- https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0017896907080127
- https://mhcc.maryland.gov/mhcc/pages/home/workgroups/documents/CON_modernization_workgroup/Articles/Article%2010.pdf
- https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10389-018-0998-1
- The current healthcare system is fragmented. That is, care is bought essentially from different doctors and specialists, even in hospital settings, rather than in an integrated manner— as, say airline travel is, where you do not separately purchase pilot, flight attendant, fuel, and baggage services. Reducing this fragmentation will naturally drive down costs, but the government has made it illegal to do so.
- I have previously mentioned that government intervention in the current healthcare system has led to more expensive and wasteful ways of treating patients. In a free-market healthcare system, if a for- profit company is inefficiently run, another company or a private-equity firm can buy up the stock cheaply, replace management, force reorganization, and eliminate the inefficiencies that are driving costs up.
- The current government regulatory approach to administering medical care via Medicare and Medicaid is a complex system that is designed to increase costs. Why else would doctors attend conferences that teach them how to maximize billing codes for Medicare and Medicaid patients? In a free-market healthcare system, prices would be subject to the laws of supply and demand and competition, and I predict that they would be a lot lower.
Absolutely garbage. Most of the world has better health care and it's socialized. For profit health care is just that, for profit. Everything else is secondary to profit.
Peer-reviewed research is "garbage"? Maybe we ought to start trusting the science.
A few additional things to consider:
Spending for health care under single-payer systems is placed against other government objectives and readily falls victim to politicians' continuous urge to campaign on tax reduction. The barebones technology, physical amenities, and queues that excessively low global budgets in single-payer systems inevitably produce compel political forces to hand over the system to ostensibly "more efficient" private market forces, which is code for allowing the quality of the healthcare experience to vary according to the patient's economic circumstance.
And, sure, the low pricing a single-payer system imposes on the system enables society to provide more genuine health care for a given budget than a more costly pluralistic system could, and it also makes universal health insurance coverage more affordable. On the other hand, the extremely low profit margins it generates for health-care providers make single-payer systems less hospitable to innovation in healthcare products and services, as well as in healthcare delivery organization, areas in which the United States excels, sometimes to the point of excess.
I'm not impressed by your peer reviewed studies. I'm familiar with the reality that other countries provide excellent care and don't leave people deeply in debt or refuse to provide service because you can't afford it. Political priorities matter and you are a shill.
So your thesis is that because there is a scam to teach doctors how to bill, we should scrap Medicare. Perhaps sending a few people to prison will discourage fraud. Have you ever used private insurance? Every interaction feels like you are being robbed and you are helpless. So in this perfect free market you propose, will you allow insurers to pick the healthy customers so they maximize profits? What do we do with the rejects?
Cheaper for whom? The burden they put on you directly is less they have to carry.
For the government and individuals, as the government no longer wastes money bailing out all those people who have far too much medical debt and individuals as they can either get healthcare for free, or they can get it from a insurance company that’ll have to charge lower prices for a better service to compete with the public healthcare.
So the government can tell you what healthcare you can and can’t have? No thank you. Government needs to have less control over our lives, not more.
As opposed to insurance companies doing the same thing and charging you for the privilege?
Your insurance, a for-profit organization, already dictates what healthcare you can or cannot have.
"Prior authorization in health care is a requirement that a healthcare provider (such as your primary care physician or a hospital) gets approval from your insurance plan before prescribing you medication or doing a medical procedure.
Without prior approval, your health insurance plan may not pay for your treatment (even if it would otherwise be covered by the plan), leaving you responsible for the full bill."
In your opinion though, it's fine for private corporations beholden to shareholders to tell you what healthcare you can have but not the publicly funded government? Excellent reasoning, no notes lol
Um…is someone going to tell them?
Because right now we have companies telling you what healthcare you can and can’t have, decided by hack doctors who lost their private practice or have malpractice suits.
They deny the fuck out of necessary treatment constantly.
Oh-and their appeals process is algorithmic in a way they literally extend it out to ensure some people die in the process to save money.
Please remember to follow all of our rules. Use the report function to report any rule-breaking comments.
Report any suspicious users to the mods of this subreddit using Modmail here or Reddit site admins here. All reports to Modmail should include evidence such as screenshots or any other relevant information.
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.