President Joe Biden - Kamala Harris Administration

#39,151
#39,151
NorthDallas40 said:
Healthcare isn’t “free”. There is a significant cost associated with it as it involves using the services of quite a few very costly professionals. So knowing that why should the government be saddled with bearing all of that cost?
Click to expand...
Yes, there are certainly costs. But we know what is meant. The man said healthcare shouldn't be free. I asked why it shouldn't be free.
 
#39,152
#39,152
EasternVol said:
Yes, there are certainly costs. But we know what is meant. The man said healthcare shouldn't be free. I asked why it shouldn't be free.
Click to expand...
And I’m pointing at the lousy terminology being used. It isn’t free you already agreed to that. So why should the government have to bear 100% of all costs related to healthcare for it to be “free”? And remind me again where the government gets its money from?
 
#39,153
#39,153
NorthDallas40 said:
And I’m pointing at the lousy terminology being used. It isn’t free you already agreed to that. So why should the government have to bear 100% of all costs related to healthcare for it to be “free”? And remind me again where the government gets its money from?
Click to expand...
That's the other side of the question. Why shouldn't the government subsidize healthcare?
 
#39,154
#39,154
EasternVol said:
That's the other side of the question. Why shouldn't the government subsidize healthcare?
Click to expand...
Actually I think the correct question is why should the government subsidize healthcare? You say you have an economics degree so I’m guessing you’ve seen the cost estimates for Medicare for all. So I’m against the US taxpayer taking that on. Change my mind.
 
  • Like
Reactions: hog88
#39,156
#39,156
NorthDallas40 said:
Actually I think the correct question is why should the government subsidize healthcare? You say you have an economics degree so I’m guessing you’ve seen the cost estimates for Medicare for all. So I’m against the US taxpayer taking that on. Change my mind.
Click to expand...
He says he has an economics degree and totally ignores the concept of costs. You know, ECON 101 ****.

If he went to UT, I'm ashamed. More likely he didn't graduate from anywhere.
 
#39,157
#39,157
ButchPlz said:
He says he has an economics degree and totally ignores the concept of costs. You know, ECON 101 ****.

If he went to UT, I'm ashamed. More likely he didn't graduate from anywhere.
Click to expand...
I’d just like to see any advocate for M4A show a realistic cost proposal that passes non partisan review indicating it can be done without bankrupting the country. None has ever been presented that I’ve seen.

There is no simple way to extend Medicare to everyone. It doesn’t work. Under the current system I’ve been paying for healthcare for 42 years (since I was 16 and got my first non farm job) that I can’t even use. Most of us have. So there’s simply no way to close that gap of people paying in who can’t use it to provide benefits to everyone. It doesn’t work.
 
#39,158
#39,158
NorthDallas40 said:
I’d just like to see any advocate for M4A show a realistic cost proposal that passes non partisan review indicating it can be done without bankrupting the country. None has ever been presented that I’ve seen.

There is no simple way to extend Medicare to everyone. It doesn’t work. Under the current system I’ve been paying for healthcare for 42 years (since I was 16 and got my first non farm job) that I can’t even use. Most of us have. So there’s simply no way to close that gap of people paying in who can’t use it to provide benefits to everyone. It doesn’t work.
Click to expand...
It's even simpler than looking at the budget. I literally work in medical supplies supply chains. There are tens of thousands, if not hundreds of thousands, of SKUs/items in a facility. Who is smart enough to figure out how to price all that accurately into services? It varies so much facility to facility, week to week, day to day. This is fundamental economics and why command economies always fail.

Not a single soul in government is capable of figuring out a reasonable way to price and pay for services that keeps hospitals providing excellent care. They already perform very poorly where we do have the closest example of "socialized" medicine in the US.

On top of all that our population is too diverse, too far spread out, and too large to run a system that's decent.
 
  • Like
Reactions: NorthDallas40
#39,159
#39,159
NorthDallas40 said:
Actually I think the correct question is why should the government subsidize healthcare? You say you have an economics degree so I’m guessing you’ve seen the cost estimates for Medicare for all. So I’m against the US taxpayer taking that on. Change my mind.
Click to expand...
I didn't say it should. I asked why it shouldn't. Maybe you're reading what's not written.
 
Last edited:
#39,161
#39,161
EasternVol said:
I didn't say it should. I asked why it shouldn't. Maybe you're reading what's not written.
Click to expand...
The current state of subsidy is there isn’t 100% cost absorption. So if you want that then the pressure is on the proponents to show feasibility. That’s how it works. Like I said no accurate or believable feasibility study has even been produced.

So the answer to your question of “why shouldn’t it be free” is “the burden is on you to prove why it should be free”. Which was my first reply to you.
 
#39,163
#39,163
NorthDallas40 said:
Actually you are. In your reply to me you acknowledged that the cost isn’t zero but then went right back to “why shouldn’t it be free?”
Click to expand...
Free in the context of the post to which I had replied. We both know that means not charged to individuals or their proxies.
 
#39,164
#39,164
NorthDallas40 said:
The current state of subsidy is there isn’t 100% cost absorption. So if you want that then the pressure is on the proponents to show feasibility. That’s how it works. Like I said no accurate or believable feasibility study has even been produced.

So the answer to your question of “why shouldn’t it be free” is “the burden is on you to prove why it should be free”. Which was my first reply to you.
Click to expand...
The man said it shouldn't be. I asked why. He or anyone else can answer if they want.
 
#39,165
#39,165
EasternVol said:
Free in the context of the post to which I had replied. We both know that means not charged to individuals or their proxies.
Click to expand...
So you want off on semantics? Ok. Show a non partisan study proving that 100% of all healthcare costs can be absorbed by the government and still be affordable which then makes healthcare “free” to the citizen. Then we can talk. Bit until that study is produced it’s a moot point. And I know there are studies out there claiming it can be done. My point is none have passed non partisan review. Semantics can work both ways I guess 🤷‍♂️
 
#39,167
#39,167
NorthDallas40 said:
So you want off on semantics? Ok. Show a non partisan study proving that 100% of all healthcare costs can be absorbed by the government and still be affordable which then makes healthcare “free” to the citizen. Then we can talk. Bit until that study is produced it’s a moot point. And I know there are studies out there claiming it can be done. My point is none have passed non partisan review. Semantics can work both ways I guess 🤷‍♂️
Click to expand...
Yes indeed it can. I'd like to see people's thoughts on why the government should not cover medical care for many or all. I gather that you believe the costs are too high. I'm curious what others think.
 
#39,168
#39,168
EasternVol said:
Yes indeed it can. I'd like to see people's thoughts on why the government should not cover medical care for many or all. I gather that you believe the costs are too high. I'm curious what others think.
Click to expand...
There are already several other threads on it so maybe necro one of those if you like. The ambiguous CBO report was rehashed in at least one of them. The one where both sides could claim victory in their 5 scenario study. Yes I’m firmly in the prove we can afford it first camp and to date have seen no such proof.
 
  • Like
Reactions: EasternVol
#39,171
#39,171
EasternVol said:
Haha, yes I understand markets. I got one of those degrees in Economics from UT, and then I applied that knowlege in my work.
Anyhow, 'why should it?' doesn't address the question.
ER's aren't overcrowded 99% because people go there for free treatment. But if that were true, free healthcare would alleviate the issue.
Why should healthcare not be free?
Click to expand...

Define free. Someone has to pay for it.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top