3 ms·

There's no question about it morality - it's immoral. Creating a system where whether you live or die is premised on your income is immoral. Even more so when s

There's no question about it morality - it's immoral. Creating a system where whether you live or die is premised on your income is immoral. Even more so when single-payer systems demonstrably achieve better health outcomes at lower prices. The reality is that that so many people in this country have bought into some kind of Capitalist Calvinism, where the suffering is not only pre-ordained by "market forces," but considered salutary itself, that it's sickened our culture beyond the capacity for reason. We'd really rather watch our friends, families, and neighbors die in sickness and poverty, than admit the failure of the grotesque just-world fallacy that is our economic ideology.

ThomPete 10y ago
It's not that simple. Single payer systems also decide who to treat and for what sicknesses, what machines to buy etc. The reason why the US system is so expensive is because of perverse incentives given to the industry. As long as you can afford it I would rather be treated in the US system than the French or Danish system.
- alphonsegaston 10y ago
  >It's not that simple. Single payer systems also decide who to treat and for what sicknesses, what machines to buy etc. So does the US, they just use one's wealth as a proxy to arrive at demonstrably worse results for everyone overall. If you want to have a system where one's income determines their ability to survive because you have enough money and that works for you right now, go ahead. But at least drop the pretense that it's in any way just or moral.
  - ThomPete 10y ago
    Thats a different discussion though. You can be of the opinion that everyone should get access to the same treatment or you can be of the opinion that they shouldn't and that people who can afford better treatment should be able to. All I was doing was point out that a single payer system has it's own issues as well. Whether you are a fan of one or the other is more a political discussion.
- cortic 10y ago
  " [] systems also decide who to treat and for what" - in privately owned companies, this decision is made to maximize profits, in publicly owned companies this decision is made to please constituents. "The reason why the US system is so expensive" - Is because an individual with a health condition is in a poor position to negotiate the price of a treatment for themselves. To the extent a private company could give fair prices, they would have to be regulated heavily. "As long as you can afford it I would rather be treated in the US" - You believe this because much of the massive profit margins goes into advertising.
  - ThomPete 10y ago
    NO I say this because I have lived both i Denmark and currently live in the US and have had two melanomas and are expecting more because I have more than a thousand of them. So I have a pretty good idea of the capabilities of the US vs. ex the Danish system.
    - cortic 10y ago
      Sorry about your problems, but you are a study of one, your experiences might be typical or atypical, flip a coin. On the other hand, you will likely have been on the receiving end of millions in advertising, and since your 'opinion' is in line with that advertising... its a good bet it is the result of it. if you are interested in some conflicting 'studies of one' have a watch; https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=thkBLpRwdSM https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=thkBLpRwdSM
      - ThomPete 10y ago
        And you a study of one too. I know the documentary but what does that have to do with whether the US system have access to more advanced healthcare than most other places. I don't need a documentary to tell me the many issues with the US system just like I don't need one to tell me the many issues with the Danish system.
- DanBC 10y ago
  > Single payer systems also decide who to treat and for what sicknesses, what machines to buy etc. Most (but not all) single payer systems coexist with private payer. In England you can get all your care on the NHS, or you can mix and match with NHS or private care.

ThomPete 10y ago

It's not that simple. Single payer systems also decide who to treat and for what sicknesses, what machines to buy etc. The reason why the US system is so expensive is because of perverse incentives given to the industry. As long as you can afford it I would rather be treated in the US system than the French or Danish system.

alphonsegaston 10y ago
>It's not that simple. Single payer systems also decide who to treat and for what sicknesses, what machines to buy etc. So does the US, they just use one's wealth as a proxy to arrive at demonstrably worse results for everyone overall. If you want to have a system where one's income determines their ability to survive because you have enough money and that works for you right now, go ahead. But at least drop the pretense that it's in any way just or moral.
- ThomPete 10y ago
  Thats a different discussion though. You can be of the opinion that everyone should get access to the same treatment or you can be of the opinion that they shouldn't and that people who can afford better treatment should be able to. All I was doing was point out that a single payer system has it's own issues as well. Whether you are a fan of one or the other is more a political discussion.
cortic 10y ago
" [] systems also decide who to treat and for what" - in privately owned companies, this decision is made to maximize profits, in publicly owned companies this decision is made to please constituents. "The reason why the US system is so expensive" - Is because an individual with a health condition is in a poor position to negotiate the price of a treatment for themselves. To the extent a private company could give fair prices, they would have to be regulated heavily. "As long as you can afford it I would rather be treated in the US" - You believe this because much of the massive profit margins goes into advertising.
- ThomPete 10y ago
  NO I say this because I have lived both i Denmark and currently live in the US and have had two melanomas and are expecting more because I have more than a thousand of them. So I have a pretty good idea of the capabilities of the US vs. ex the Danish system.
  - cortic 10y ago
    Sorry about your problems, but you are a study of one, your experiences might be typical or atypical, flip a coin. On the other hand, you will likely have been on the receiving end of millions in advertising, and since your 'opinion' is in line with that advertising... its a good bet it is the result of it. if you are interested in some conflicting 'studies of one' have a watch; https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=thkBLpRwdSM https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=thkBLpRwdSM
    - ThomPete 10y ago
      And you a study of one too. I know the documentary but what does that have to do with whether the US system have access to more advanced healthcare than most other places. I don't need a documentary to tell me the many issues with the US system just like I don't need one to tell me the many issues with the Danish system.
DanBC 10y ago
> Single payer systems also decide who to treat and for what sicknesses, what machines to buy etc. Most (but not all) single payer systems coexist with private payer. In England you can get all your care on the NHS, or you can mix and match with NHS or private care.