3 ms·
We do need Health Care reform, but I'm not convinced single payer government is going to lead to better outcomes. > No, we need to get rid of private insurance
by balls187 7y ago
We do need Health Care reform, but I'm not convinced single payer government is going to lead to better outcomes.
> No, we need to get rid of private insurance with Medicare for All.
That would shift the incentivization from maximizing profits, to instead solely minimizing tax payer dollars.
Lobbying would still exist (see defense industry).
Denying care wouldn't be based on health reasons (dubious), but shift to class based reasons (see welfare).
And, our healthcare will instead be subject to the whims of the politics, rather than the profits for Shareholders.
Medicare works because it's beneficiaries are a strong voting block. There are population segments in America who aren't.
- claudeganon 7y ago>And, our healthcare will instead be subject to the whims of the politics, rather than the profits for Shareholders. Medicare works because it's beneficiaries are a strong voting block. There are population segments in America who aren't. The point of Medicare for All is also to instantiate this new voting block across as much of the population as possible, to imbue them with this political power and free them from control by their employers and the profit-seeking of healthcare companies. You have the causation backwards: government provided healthcare among the elderly is what has created their defense of the system. Medicare for All extends the possibility of this defense to everyone.
- creaghpatr 7y agoMedicare works because it is subsidized by private insurance payers. The system in its current form would collapse instantly if every American became covered exclusively by Medicare.
- balls187 7y agoAlso subsidized by current tax payers.