4 ms·

>>"leaves millions without insurance and since they're usually low-income and therefore cash-poor This is still false, infact the most impacted group by medic

>>"leaves millions without insurance and since they're usually low-income and therefore cash-poor This is still false, infact the most impacted group by medical costs is the Middle Class not the poor. People too "rich" to be on public assistance programs like Medicade but too poor to afford a medical emergency and work for employers that either do not offer insurance, or have poor coverage. >>the words "bankruptcy can be a good thing" is going to be bouncing around my head for a while. I have known more than a few people that have gone through bankruptcy and it was the best thing they could have ever done. One mistake people often make is waiting tooo long to declare bankruptcy. Bankrupcy is a legal tool designed to provide aid to people who find themselves in too much debt, there are all kinds of things built into that system to assit people. It really is not a punishment. For example most people do not realize that they can Keep their primary residence and primary transportation even after declared Bankrupcy. People have this vision that is you file for Bankrupcy *protection* the police are going to come take all your things and put you on the street. >>I'm a little bit horrified thinking what kind of creative solutions these providers would come up with ... One thing that is prevented by Regulation is Medical Coop's several have been tried but they can not navigate the regulations to make them workable. Non-profit Member owned Coops would be a great thing for medicine, just has it did for Utilities in many regions of the US. When even companies like Walmart can not make low cost medical services work directly as a result of regulation you know there is an issue.

smcl 4y ago
You're dancing around the issue: you shouldn't need to have that debt, regardless of how spiritually cleansing you think the bankruptcy process might be. If you'd asked the people who went through it whether they'd rather a national insurer handle , I am sure they would have far preferred that. I'm quite shocked you know multiple people have had this kind of medical debt and can still come back with the bankruptcy-is-good-actually line. I kind of feel like you're trolling me a bit, if I'm honest.
- aww_dang 4y ago
  Perhaps we should check our premises. Would you agree that subsidies and regulations increase prices?
  - smcl 4y ago
    Not necessarily
- phpisthebest 4y ago
  >>you shouldn't need to have that debt, Why? Or I guess I should ask what other requirements of life should be completely under the governments control? Should Government run farms and give you food for free? Should government build homes and issue them to people? I have never been clear why healthcare is uniquely something that must be provided by government but other things are not. If you think the government should provide everything you need to live like they were a parent or nanny well then we have completely and incompatible views as to what a government should be
  - smcl 4y ago
    > Should Government run farms and give you food for free? The government do provide assistance for food for those in need, and they are right to. > Should government build homes and issue them to people? Local governments in most developed countries build homes and issue them to the needy. And I believe this is correct. You've obviously deployed exaggeration to try to make these things sound ridiculous ("...completely under the governments control..." and "...live like they were a parent or nanny...") but really none of this is controversial, they're pretty common, mainstream beliefs. I believe that a government should work to better the lives of the citizens it governs. This includes things like providing education, healthcare, road and rail infrastructure among other things you probably wouldn't like. I am quite sure we have incompatible views as to what government should be and that we both believe the other's vision of an "ideal" country would actually be a dystopia. However some of the happiest, healthiest and best-educated countries operate pretty close to my ideal.
    - phpisthebest 4y ago
      >>The government do provide assistance for food for those in need, and they are right to. This is always the comeback to that question. The US provides food assitance and Medical Care Assitance to low income people via many many many government programs, very expensive government programs That is NOT the same thing as NHS, which completely takes over and provides the care. Food Assistance gives people with out income money to go buy the resources on the open market. Medicade gives people with out income money to go by resorces on the very regulated US health system This is not an analog to NHS or other government run single payer health systems So again I ask, not about providing social safety net, but should the government completely take over farming and housing like the NHS and other government provided programs do for health services >>This includes things like providing education, healthcare, road and rail infrastructure among other things you probably wouldn't like Correct, Government is incompetence personified. The incentives for government programs do not include providing quality services at the most value. Driving on my roads, going to the government schools I went to, and seeing first hand what "government housing" is has cemented the fact that government provides poor quality services at extremely high costs >>However some of the happiest, healthiest and best-educated countries operate pretty close to my ideal. That is very debatable, and not really supported by hard data

smcl 4y ago

You're dancing around the issue: you shouldn't need to have that debt, regardless of how spiritually cleansing you think the bankruptcy process might be. If you'd asked the people who went through it whether they'd rather a national insurer handle , I am sure they would have far preferred that. I'm quite shocked you know multiple people have had this kind of medical debt and can still come back with the bankruptcy-is-good-actually line. I kind of feel like you're trolling me a bit, if I'm honest.

aww_dang 4y ago
Perhaps we should check our premises. Would you agree that subsidies and regulations increase prices?
- smcl 4y ago
  Not necessarily
phpisthebest 4y ago
>>you shouldn't need to have that debt, Why? Or I guess I should ask what other requirements of life should be completely under the governments control? Should Government run farms and give you food for free? Should government build homes and issue them to people? I have never been clear why healthcare is uniquely something that must be provided by government but other things are not. If you think the government should provide everything you need to live like they were a parent or nanny well then we have completely and incompatible views as to what a government should be
- smcl 4y ago
  > Should Government run farms and give you food for free? The government do provide assistance for food for those in need, and they are right to. > Should government build homes and issue them to people? Local governments in most developed countries build homes and issue them to the needy. And I believe this is correct. You've obviously deployed exaggeration to try to make these things sound ridiculous ("...completely under the governments control..." and "...live like they were a parent or nanny...") but really none of this is controversial, they're pretty common, mainstream beliefs. I believe that a government should work to better the lives of the citizens it governs. This includes things like providing education, healthcare, road and rail infrastructure among other things you probably wouldn't like. I am quite sure we have incompatible views as to what government should be and that we both believe the other's vision of an "ideal" country would actually be a dystopia. However some of the happiest, healthiest and best-educated countries operate pretty close to my ideal.
  - phpisthebest 4y ago
    >>The government do provide assistance for food for those in need, and they are right to. This is always the comeback to that question. The US provides food assitance and Medical Care Assitance to low income people via many many many government programs, very expensive government programs That is NOT the same thing as NHS, which completely takes over and provides the care. Food Assistance gives people with out income money to go buy the resources on the open market. Medicade gives people with out income money to go by resorces on the very regulated US health system This is not an analog to NHS or other government run single payer health systems So again I ask, not about providing social safety net, but should the government completely take over farming and housing like the NHS and other government provided programs do for health services >>This includes things like providing education, healthcare, road and rail infrastructure among other things you probably wouldn't like Correct, Government is incompetence personified. The incentives for government programs do not include providing quality services at the most value. Driving on my roads, going to the government schools I went to, and seeing first hand what "government housing" is has cemented the fact that government provides poor quality services at extremely high costs >>However some of the happiest, healthiest and best-educated countries operate pretty close to my ideal. That is very debatable, and not really supported by hard data