So I read through the thread on 2016 which started out about Obamacare and went into infinite other things.
My opinion on Obamacare is that we're better off with it than without it but it's still a shitty bill. I read a ton of what I'd describe as paranoia on that thread and don't think it is anything to fear. I personally support a single-payer system and something more akin to our Canadian and European friends. I say that even though it would likely have a negative impact on me personally, as I'm one of those fairly high income people with good employer-based insurance. I try to view all issues from a macro viewpoint of what is best for society rather than for me personally.
On Obamacare, he was determined to pass something for legacy sake. He knew that in the current (or 4 yr ago) environment, he'd never get anything through unless he got pharma and the insurance companies on board - so yes, just more cutthroat capitalism rather than a care-oriented approach. And then he refused to look into the malpractice lititgation issues that are very real for providers today because he wasn't going to fuck with the trial lawyers. Point being, I have my views on what should be done but I also try to be objective.
With no offense intended to anyone, what pisses me off is how the opposers never seem to have any suggestions. Being against something without any recommendations isn't of much value. So thus the point of this post. I'm curious what ya'll think should be done.
Today, insurance is tied to employment and employers have no mandate to offer or defray costs. Do you believe any full time employer should be forced to have a health care program reasonably priced and subsidized by the employer? Should there be regulations on what that insurance offers? Should insurance be tied to employment.
A huge cost today is people who don't have or can't afford insurance using the emergency room. I made a career change a year ago and looked into buying a policy. What I found is that all that exists out there are policies to protect you if something major happens - cancer, run over by a bus, etc. There's a huge deductible. What it does not cover AT ALL for the most part is the ability for someone to do what I did yesterday - take their sick kid to the doctor. So..... in today's world if you buy a policy for the worst-case scenario, you still will likely use the emergency room and lack primary care to take care of things before they are too bad.
The reason why I support a socialized healthcare system where people can buy supplemental insurance to improve choices is because it allows everyone to go to the doctor and get taken care of. It doesn't force employers to pay for it, which in turn makes burgers cost too much. It admits that all human beings deserve basic dignity and health.
I suport single payer because it would cut huge amounts of administartive costs that make life horrendous for practitioners. I have a good friend who is a GP and trying to comply with each insurance company's rules, chase them down for payment, answer their stupid questions, etc adds a huge distarction and amount of cost to the business.
I'm happy to go on and on with my opinions but I am curious what the naysayers to Obamacare or socialized medicine believe should be done. I will say up front that if you try to claim the market solves all woes or that we shouldn't give a shit about anyone but ourselves, then you're fundamentally ignoring the issue. I'm curious what reforms you support to make healthcare more accessible to the majority of people who don't have it - the WORKING poor.
