View Full Version : California's Government Run Health Care Proposal
Williamsmith
6-1-17, 12:45pm
http://www.latimes.com/politics/la-pol-sac-single-payer-explainer-20170601-htmlstory.html
http://www.mercurynews.com/2017/05/27/california-democrats-wrestle-with-proposal-to-replace-private-health-insurance-with-single-payer-system/
I think this is a great idea. California can be a test state before we roll out the national program. Some Californians bemoan the fact that they can't swing elections with their popular vote. Well, now they can make a real impact. Show the rest of the country how it is done and how happy everyone will be.
ApatheticNoMore
6-1-17, 1:00pm
The Dem legislature will probably stop it, they don't want it. I mean if they had any actual interest in it, it would happen, but they really don't seem to. Maybe with an immense amount of pressure from the citizenry they can be made to change their tune.
Hard to get people as politically apathetic as Californians (ok maybe that's just southern Californians :)) to do anything though. Also if it happened, I'm not sure how you would make sure people from other states without much healthcare wouldn't decide to hop on over to California and use the system, that one is difficult.
Teacher Terry
6-1-17, 1:18pm
Massachusetts has had single payer for a long time. If they can do so can the rest of the states. I think it was when Romney was governor that it started.
Massachusetts has had single payer for a long time. If they can do so can the rest of the states. I think it was when Romney was governor that it started.That's pretty cool, except that Massachusetts does not, nor has it ever had a single payer system. They have forced insurance purchases just like the Affordable Care Act.
Teacher Terry
6-1-17, 1:24pm
MA had Romneycare before the ACA came to be.
MA had Romneycare before the ACA came to be.I know, and it's not single payer, never has been.
gimmethesimplelife
6-1-17, 1:28pm
California really is looking more and more interesting to me every day.....somewhere far North and not extremely expensive like Redding sounds nice, though I don't know how advisable it is for an everyday person not to be within reasonable distance of the Mexican border just in case.......Rob
...though I don't know how advisable it is for an everyday person not to be within reasonable distance of the Mexican border just in case.......Rob
Canada is a far nicer place.
I know, and it's not single payer, never has been.
Like Obamacare, just another way to sell insurance.
Although, I'll be getting single payer, just like most everyone else does, when I turn 65 in a few years (assuming it's still around).
When I was an Air Force brat, I not only had single payer, but largely government provided healthcare.
Let them try. The States are supposed to act as "laboratories of democracy". Of all the States, they're probably best situated to make the attempt: they're large and rich, and don't have a significant percentage of providers outside their regulatory grasp (which was one big problem Vermont had). I would think the impact on their taxpayers would be the biggest issue for them. They're already a high-tax state with some major fiscal and pension headaches. A major increase in the tax burden might drive out businesses and middle class people, to be replaced by benefit-seekers.
https://www.bloomberg.com/view/articles/2017-05-30/states-where-single-payer-health-care-could-work-if-it-could-work-anywhere
When I was an Air Force brat, I not only had single payer, but largely government provided healthcare.
Except that it was earned as a perq of your parent's service. Typically, less than 1% of Americans at any given time can lay claim to that distinction.
Except that it was earned as a perq of your parent's service. Typically, less than 1% of Americans at any given time can lay claim to that distinction.
But (my information is old, I'm not sure how much military healthcare has changed in the past 30-40 years) per many people that would be an absolutely horrible way to deliver healthcare - why would we then accept subjecting our military and their families to it?
Other than them not be being front edge technology (I've got some impressive knee surgery scars because they hadn't picked up arthroscopic surgery yet, although it was propagating elsewhere), I thought it was pretty good.
Teacher Terry
6-1-17, 3:10pm
A military friend of mine got top of the line care by Stanford's best doc's when he had a rare neck/throat cancer all at no cost to him through the VA system.
But (my information is old, I'm not sure how much military healthcare has changed in the past 30-40 years) per many people that would be an absolutely horrible way to deliver healthcare - why would we then accept subjecting our military and their families to it?
That's simple, they earned it when others did not.
That's simple, they earned it when others did not.
But the underlying argument is this system of healthcare delivery is not supposed to work.
iris lilies
6-1-17, 5:15pm
But the underlying argument is this system of healthcare delivery is not supposed to work.
I can see the difference in single payer sucess in a mono culture and single payer success in the big diverse country of ours. The military is a sort of mono culture, or semi-mono culture, And its culture is controlled to some extent by the U.S. Military.
I can see the difference in single payer sucess in a mono culture and single payer success in the big diverse country of ours. The military is a sort of mono culture, or semi-mono culture, And its culture is which also has a culture controlled to some extent by the U.S. Military.
Hey, they force you to exercise whether you want to or not. They make you take random drug tests. They kick you out if you get too fat, too crazy or too drunk in the wrong circumstances. The great majority of military are under forty. You can't even get in if you have any number of pre-existing conditions. Health care wise, I would think it was a bit of a slam dunk.
But the underlying argument is this system of healthcare delivery is not supposed to work.
Yet my father-in-law, a WWII vet, received quite good care, up until the day of his passing last week. The VA is even helping us with some of the arrangements.
My cousin-in-law, a paratrooper with some serious health issues, in his 40s, also reports he's getting quite good care from the VA system, but then again he's a nurse now, and knows how to operate healthcare systems.
From the flaws in the VA system they have described, it sounds better in some ways, worse than others to what I get for my insurance/healthcare. For instance, as we are now in Michigan for an extended period of time dealing with the final days/death/memorial service for my FIL, my wife discovered she couldn't get her prescriptions filled here, because she's "out of area". Fortunately, our at-home small-town pharmacist, with a phone call, Fedexed the meds to her and will sort it out later.
When I was in Scandinavia recently, I chatted with folks in several different countries about their healthcare system, and they seemed mostly-pleased, with some notable pros-and-cons. Then again, those countries have small populations, good wealth, and mostly-monocultures until recently.
à chacun son goût
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2025 vBulletin Solutions Inc. All rights reserved.