ACP Endorses Single-Payer system

This forum made possible through the generous support of SDN members, donors, and sponsors. Thank you.

PalmTreeDreamer

Queen of Neon Socks
10+ Year Member
Joined
Jun 6, 2011
Messages
35
Reaction score
16
“Although the United States leads the world in health care spending, it fares far worse than its peers on coverage and most dimensions of value. Cost and coverage are intertwined. Many Americans cannot afford health insurance, and even those with insurance face substantial cost-related barriers to care. Employer-sponsored insurance is less prevalent and more expensive than in the past, and in response, deductibles have grown and benefits have been cut. The long-term solvency of U.S. public insurance programs is a perennial concern. The United States spends far more on healthcare administration than peer countries. Administrative barriers divert time from patient care and frustrate patients, clinicians, and policymakers. Major changes are needed to a system that costs too much, leaves too many behind, and delivers too little.”


Members don't see this ad.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Awesome. Once I hit FIRE I can quit and be assured of health care.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 users
Members don't see this ad :)
I doubt if I'd be paying more than I do now for insurance.

You’ll be paying more for everything else via the new VAT tax, new taxes on the “rich”, and those tax free retirement accounts? Yeah the govt will be raiding those too.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 users
“Although the United States leads the world in health care spending, it fares far worse than its peers on coverage and most dimensions of value. Cost and coverage are intertwined. Many Americans cannot afford health insurance, and even those with insurance face substantial cost-related barriers to care. Employer-sponsored insurance is less prevalent and more expensive than in the past, and in response, deductibles have grown and benefits have been cut. The long-term solvency of U.S. public insurance programs is a perennial concern. The United States spends far more on healthcare administration than peer countries. Administrative barriers divert time from patient care and frustrate patients, clinicians, and policymakers. Major changes are needed to a system that costs too much, leaves too many behind, and delivers too little.”


The ACPs endorsement of single payor HC is disgusting. They think they can curry favor with the Bernie loving public when in reality these voters despise doctors. When are they gonna realize they they have no friends on either side of the political spectrum. Apparently the ACP thinks self immolation will set them free. Ha!
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users
LMAO @ "long term solvency is a concern". Things will run MUCH more efficiently and cost effectively when Bernie controls it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users
I think the ACP’s bowties are on a little too tight...
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users
ACP is the far left of medicine. Their opinions are meaningless. Like the famous saying.. opinions are like A-holes.. everybody has one.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 4 users
ACP is the far left of medicine. Their opinions are meaningless. Like the famous saying.. opinions are like A-holes.. everybody has one.

You are correct. Unfortunately the media will pick up on their endorsement and say "doctor's groups support single payer" when in reality the situation is far from a unanimous opinion.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 users
The problem with the ACP statement is that it expresses an ideal that is not grounded in reality.

1) There is no way to provide high-quality, single-payer healthcare to everyone in America. First, Medicare for All is not a true single payer as it involves copays and deductibles. Second, the price tag is somewhere around $3T/year which would essentially double our budget which already runs at a $1T/year deficit despite record revenues. If we cannot bring forth the political will to balance our current budget, believing that we can do it once it doubles is fantasyland. The best that we could do is to further expand Medicaid which is not quality healthcare and probably not sustainable.

2) The notion that supplying the uninsured with healthcare will improve disease-oriented outcomes is poorly supported. Look no further than the Oregon experience with their Medicaid expansion to see that enrolling people on Medicaid increases utilization but does little to actually improve health. Sure, expanding Medicaid improves financial health for health systems and the recipient class, but not physical health. That is probably because the drivers of poor physical health are also the same ones that drive poverty, and they are far more influenced by personal decisions than anything that a doctor does in a 30 minute visit.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
I think what will happen will be a two-tier system, public and and private via public option. I also think we’re a decade or more from that becoming a reality.

What I personally would like to see is real price controls by doing things like letting Medicare negotiate drug prices and eliminating needless FDA regulations. There should also be limits on what providers can charge For services, and the cuts should happen up top (the admins) and not below (doctors).
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
“Although the United States leads the world in health care spending, it fares far worse than its peers on coverage and most dimensions of value. Cost and coverage are intertwined. Many Americans cannot afford health insurance, and even those with insurance face substantial cost-related barriers to care. Employer-sponsored insurance is less prevalent and more expensive than in the past, and in response, deductibles have grown and benefits have been cut. The long-term solvency of U.S. public insurance programs is a perennial concern. The United States spends far more on healthcare administration than peer countries. Administrative barriers divert time from patient care and frustrate patients, clinicians, and policymakers. Major changes are needed to a system that costs too much, leaves too many behind, and delivers too little.”

ACP also signed that bullcrap gun policy suggestion paper. Screw them. Go back to managing blood pressure and stay out of policy
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 users
Out of all the possible systems we are going to get single payer just isn't a possibility. Even if we move to Medicare/Medicaid for all we will still have all of the myriad "advantage plans" managed by UHC, Anthem, etc. I'm not an advocate for socialized care but I do stipulate that single payer would create some efficiencies. But not if we just expand M&M as it's managed currently.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 3 users
Out of all the possible systems we are going to get single payer just isn't a possibility. Even if we move to Medicare/Medicaid for all we will still have all of the myriad "advantage plans" managed by UHC, Anthem, etc. I'm not an advocate for socialized care but I do stipulate that single payer would create some efficiencies. But not if we just expand M&M as it's managed currently.
Not a bad post to break a 5 year absence.

Welcome back
 
  • Like
  • Hmm
Reactions: 1 users
Probably not as far left as the AAP.

I still can't believe so many doctors were willing to be props and stand up there on television behind the President when Obamacare was becoming law.

Expect something similar when Prez Bernie announces Medicaid-for-all. I'm sure some communist white coats will be happy to get their moment on TV.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
I still can't believe so many doctors were willing to be props and stand up there on television behind the President when Obamacare was becoming law.

Expect something similar when Prez Bernie announces Medicaid-for-all. I'm sure some communist white coats will be happy to get their moment on TV.
I wouldn't stand there as a prop for any politician, no matter where they stood on various issues. They're all corrupt scum.

Sent from my SM-G930V using SDN mobile
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Top