An article by Ralph Nader:
http://www.counterpunch.org/2013/11...-health-care-system-is-better-than-obamacare/
http://www.counterpunch.org/2013/11...-health-care-system-is-better-than-obamacare/
Health Issues (US) Obamacare (Affordable Care Act)
- Thread starter Amy SF
- Start date
ledboots
Peace
ledboots
Peace
From the article ↑↑
"In the early 1960s, President Lyndon Johnson enrolled 20 million elderly Americans into Medicare in six months. There were no websites. They did it with index cards!"
Lol. Sometimes computers don't help.
"In the early 1960s, President Lyndon Johnson enrolled 20 million elderly Americans into Medicare in six months. There were no websites. They did it with index cards!"
Lol. Sometimes computers don't help.
"Number 1:
In Canada, the majority of citizens love their health care system.
In the United States, the majority of citizens, physicians, and nurses prefer the Canadian type system – single-payer, free choice of doctor and hospital , everybody in, nobody out."
If only it were so. Nader is as delusional as he is arrogant. I'd like for this to be true, but if wishes were horses...
I'd like to know where he's getting his 31 million uninsured from. I've read 19 million uninsured many times. Is it expected to go up over the next several years?
Source?
Are you shitting me? It's from the article that you posted the link to. Did you even read it?
Of course I read it. You claimed Nader is delusional, but gave no sources to back up why he's arrogant or delusional. If you're claiming a person is delusional, it's up to you to back it up.
Actually, it's Nader who should be backing up claims. I'd like to now how he comes up with "In the United States, the majority of citizens, physicians, and nurses prefer the Canadian type system – single-payer, free choice of doctor and hospital , everybody in, nobody out." As much as I would like for that to be true, I have never seen any poll to suggest that it is.
If I claim a person is delusional it is a matter of opinion. Same with his arrogance. I'm not sure what kind of statistic you're expecting to make you happy, but based on other posts you've made, I'm pretty sure you can satisfy yourself with a little bit of Google. There are plenty of people in the world who agree with Nader in most matters of principle (like me) but still think he's an ***.
ledboots
Peace
Just using personal experience, I haven't met a physician who talks positively about the Affordable Care Act. I work with a large group of physicians, med students, residents, nurses, and midwives. The most common thing discussed relating to this topic is "how many years till I can retire?"
http://blogs.chicagotribune.com/new...-canadians-like-their-health-care-system.html
According to this, Canadians like their own health care system.
http://pnhp.org/blog/2009/12/09/two-thirds-support-3/
Plenty of polls show Americans are in favor of single-payer. Nothing he said appears to be delusional to me.
I never made claims about Canada's likes or dislikes. I find it questionable that the article talks about questions asked but not how the polls were administered to support its clams and dismisses those of the most notable of polling organizations like Gallup and Rasmussen as "misleading" or "outlier." The cherry-picking used to compare the polls, by and author who is obviously trying to prove his own position, should be a warning sign. Your article doesn't appear objective at all, but congratulations on finding it, for however many grains of salt it is worth.
I've been listening and reading Nader for the last 40-something years or so. He's arrogant and delusional.
Last edited:
This is my experience also (not profession but shared discussion), and I tend to be around more liberally minded people.
Wolfie
Forum Legend
- Joined
- Jun 5, 2012
- Reaction score
- 497
beancounter
The Fire That Burns Within
You know, with all the erroneous charges I've received from the doctor, and for being charged for an office visit on a 10 second conversation with him, I find it hard for my heart to bleed for the poor doctors who have to deal with the ACA's requirements.
das_nut
Forum Legend
- Joined
- Jun 4, 2012
- Reaction score
- 579
beancounter
The Fire That Burns Within
It will probably add more paperwork and red tape. I've heard doctors complain about that sort of thing in general, before the ACA.
Also, now that more people will have health insurance, it increases the likelyhood that there will be an increase in bad debts - while people will technically have insurance, their deductables will be high enough that most will pay out of pocket for the majority of the medical care.
das_nut
Forum Legend
- Joined
- Jun 4, 2012
- Reaction score
- 579
Why? All the ACA states is that people have to get health insurance. Doctors already have to deal with health insurance plans.
Up until $6k or so. I'm not sure how bad debt breaks down - if it's due to one massive bill, or if people can't pay smaller bills. If it's primarily due to massive bills, then the ACA should reduce the amount of bad debts. If it's the smaller bills, I don't see how it changes much - people will have some insurance, and it's doubtful they were avoiding doctors before when they were sick or injured.[/quote]
beancounter
The Fire That Burns Within
[/quote]
I think it's reasonable to assume there will be additional paperwork and requirements to comply with, with regard to ACA related patients.
I think it's just logical that the poor have less ability to pay for medical care than the middle class. So when the medical bills start coming in (because the deductable hasn't been met), they are more likely to default.
And there are a lot of people who avoid going to the doctor because they can't afford it. That won't change under the ACA - because of the high deductable. And if they do go, the poor are less likely to have the ability to pay it back.
But I get the sense you have information to the contrary. So instead of leading me on, please share.
das_nut
Forum Legend
- Joined
- Jun 4, 2012
- Reaction score
- 579
As far as I know, ACA does four main things - creates a fine if you don't have insurance, gives subsidies to low-income individuals for insurance, extends medicare coverage for the poor, and creates new regulations for the insurance companies in regards to who they must cover and what they must cover.
From the doctors' perspective, nothing changes - they bill the patient & insurance company/medicare, same as before.
Similar threads
