What is sad is that the whole rest of the world knows making health care public cut the cost in half.
The Second Term of Donald J. Trump as President of the United States of America
- Thread starter sear
- Start date
What is sad is that the whole rest of the world knows making health care public cut the cost in half.
Single payer?
Could be.
Single payer is where the government foots the bill for health care, but existing private providers like hospitals, clinics, medical offices, etc. still do all the actual work.
But I would not mind if the hospitals, clinics, medical offices, etc., were also run by the government, like they were back in the 1950s.
The doctors back then had more flexibility to do what they felt was appropriate, instead of everything being judged based on cost.
Last edited:
Nobody likes "bean counters".
It's not that you're wrong.
But a finite budget requires prioritization, "cost containment".
That's not an endorsement. It's an explanation.
Shiftless2
Well-known member
When were those hospitals etc run by the government?
Under single payer the decision about treatments is entirely up to the patient and doctor - no arguments with an insurance company as to what's covered and what isn't.
Shiftless2
Well-known member
There have been thousands of lawsuits over the use of Roundup
Monsanto Roundup Lawsuit Update
In this post, our Roundup lawyers will give you: An update on where things stand in the Roundup class action lawsuit in February 2026 The likely direction the Roundup litigation will take moving ...
Shiftless2
Well-known member
Gotta love these guys
www.facebook.com
61K views · 2.6K reactions | He didn’t realize he was proving my point😂 | Parkergetajob | Facebook
He didn’t realize he was proving my point😂
www.facebook.com
The way it used to be is that medical providers had sufficient staff to deal with the all reasonable contingencies, so there was no additional cost to anything.
Now they reduce staff to the bare minimum, and if they need more, either for expertise of volume, they have to subcontract it out and lose money.
Wisconsin used to have socialist governors and mayors, so hospitals were essentially free unless you were wealthy.
It was in the 1950s when McCarthyism started switching over to capitalism and in 1957 in particular when health insurance was allowed as a tax exemption by the IRS, so health insurance started to become popular instead of public healthcare.
I like single payer, but government run hospitals and clinics could save even more money.
There have been thousands of lawsuits over the use of Roundup
Monsanto Roundup Lawsuit Update
In this post, our Roundup lawyers will give you: An update on where things stand in the Roundup class action lawsuit in February 2026 The likely direction the Roundup litigation will take moving ...www.lawsuit-information-center.com
And yet glyphosate is still commonly used by commercial agriculture in the US.
I appreciate efficiency.
There are reportedly E.U. member nations that have lower per capita healthcare costs, with superior patient outcomes, compared to the U.S.
- dandy -
Seems to me we needn't re-invent the wheel.
If they have a better way, why not try that?
The answer of course is, Republicans in congress obstruct such progress as "socialist", thereby both keeping our per capita healthcare costs up, and benefiting the status quo, the establishment.
I can't formulate a persuasive argument against privatization, regarding healthcare, or prisons for examples.
But I would prefer that such transition be based on valid economics as well as equal or superior treatment. Change for sake of change seems inappropriate.