4 ms·

In all fairness, Bernie Sanders did want to eliminate private insurance under his medicare for all proposal. https://www.nytimes.com/2019/03/23/health/private-

In all fairness, Bernie Sanders did want to eliminate private insurance under his medicare for all proposal. https://www.nytimes.com/2019/03/23/health/private-health-insurance-medicare-for-all-bernie-sanders.html https://www.nytimes.com/2019/03/23/health/private-health-ins... Warren and DeBlasio also signaled they would abolish private insurance. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IaTecufx8Sk https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IaTecufx8Sk

kerkeslager 2y ago
That's just the unclear messaging that the right wing is taking advantage of. I don't have a NYT subscription so I can't see the whole article, but as far as I can tell, there's nothing in that article that mentions actually preventing companies from offering private health insurance--it's just assumed (correctly) that these companies will be operating at a miniscule fraction of their current scale when people can obtain health insurance from a single payer, because few people will pay for private health insurance when there are better, cheaper options. As I've reiterated repeatedly, this isn't a loss of options. Health insurance companies can still operate and consumers can still pay for private health insurance, they'll simply be competing with a cheaper alternative that doesn't have a perverse incentive to deny care. I suppose you could make the argument that there will be fewer options because some of these insurance companies will go bankrupt, but that's just capitalism--there's nothing about the current system which guarantees health insurance companies will remain solvent or guarantees a variety of insurance options. In practice there are many places in the U.S. where there's effectively only one health insurance option.
- s1artibartfast 2y ago
  you are wrong again! please read the article >There are few international analogues to the Medicare for all proposals, but Canada, which provides similar doctor and hospital benefits for its residents, probably comes closest. Even there, people buy private insurance for benefits that are not covered by the government program, like prescription drugs and dental care. Most other countries with single-payer systems allow a more expansive, competing role for private coverage. In Britain, for example, everyone is covered by a public system, but people can pay extra for insurance that gives them access to private doctors. https://archive.is/UqCOC#selection-857.0-945.254 https://archive.is/UqCOC#selection-857.0-945.254
  - kerkeslager 2y ago
    There is nothing in what you quoted that refutes anything I said. If you have something to say, say it--I'm not going to buy a NYT subscription so that I can speculate what you are referring when you can't be bothered to explain yourself.
    - s1artibartfast 2y ago
      I provided you a link to the article. Im not asking you to buy a NYT subscription.
      - kerkeslager 2y ago
        Okay, I see the article now, but I still don't see anything that supports your claim that the left is/was fixated on taking away private healthcare options. Your claim at face value is absurd: if you want to waste your money on private insurance that is more expensive and will do everything they can to not pay out, have at it. Why would anyone on the left care? I assure you we don't. We're trying to give people healthcare, not take away options. The only coherent complaint you have actually stated seems to be a poorly-communicated complaint that you don't get to pick and choose which taxes you pay. If that's your complaint, I find it a bit surprising that you want to start by opting out of paying for healthcare instead of, say, corporate subsidies to predatory lenders, farm subsidies to corn which is turned into HFCS, or NSA violating privacy of citizens. Or, for that matter, existing healthcare subsidies which are more expensive than single-payer healthcare would be?
        s1artibartfast 2y ago
        Of course I dont want to waste my money. I dont think claiming I do is good faith discussion. Same with with assuming I want or support your long list of other subsidies. You seem to be arguing with a strawman instead of what I'm saying. If you support a public healthcare option where I can choose to opt of the cost and service, then you have my support too! It is really that simple.

kerkeslager 2y ago

That's just the unclear messaging that the right wing is taking advantage of. I don't have a NYT subscription so I can't see the whole article, but as far as I can tell, there's nothing in that article that mentions actually preventing companies from offering private health insurance--it's just assumed (correctly) that these companies will be operating at a miniscule fraction of their current scale when people can obtain health insurance from a single payer, because few people will pay for private health insurance when there are better, cheaper options. As I've reiterated repeatedly, this isn't a loss of options. Health insurance companies can still operate and consumers can still pay for private health insurance, they'll simply be competing with a cheaper alternative that doesn't have a perverse incentive to deny care. I suppose you could make the argument that there will be fewer options because some of these insurance companies will go bankrupt, but that's just capitalism--there's nothing about the current system which guarantees health insurance companies will remain solvent or guarantees a variety of insurance options. In practice there are many places in the U.S. where there's effectively only one health insurance option.

s1artibartfast 2y ago
you are wrong again! please read the article >There are few international analogues to the Medicare for all proposals, but Canada, which provides similar doctor and hospital benefits for its residents, probably comes closest. Even there, people buy private insurance for benefits that are not covered by the government program, like prescription drugs and dental care. Most other countries with single-payer systems allow a more expansive, competing role for private coverage. In Britain, for example, everyone is covered by a public system, but people can pay extra for insurance that gives them access to private doctors. https://archive.is/UqCOC#selection-857.0-945.254 https://archive.is/UqCOC#selection-857.0-945.254
- kerkeslager 2y ago
  There is nothing in what you quoted that refutes anything I said. If you have something to say, say it--I'm not going to buy a NYT subscription so that I can speculate what you are referring when you can't be bothered to explain yourself.
  - s1artibartfast 2y ago
    I provided you a link to the article. Im not asking you to buy a NYT subscription.
    - kerkeslager 2y ago
      Okay, I see the article now, but I still don't see anything that supports your claim that the left is/was fixated on taking away private healthcare options. Your claim at face value is absurd: if you want to waste your money on private insurance that is more expensive and will do everything they can to not pay out, have at it. Why would anyone on the left care? I assure you we don't. We're trying to give people healthcare, not take away options. The only coherent complaint you have actually stated seems to be a poorly-communicated complaint that you don't get to pick and choose which taxes you pay. If that's your complaint, I find it a bit surprising that you want to start by opting out of paying for healthcare instead of, say, corporate subsidies to predatory lenders, farm subsidies to corn which is turned into HFCS, or NSA violating privacy of citizens. Or, for that matter, existing healthcare subsidies which are more expensive than single-payer healthcare would be?
      - s1artibartfast 2y ago
        Of course I dont want to waste my money. I dont think claiming I do is good faith discussion. Same with with assuming I want or support your long list of other subsidies. You seem to be arguing with a strawman instead of what I'm saying. If you support a public healthcare option where I can choose to opt of the cost and service, then you have my support too! It is really that simple.