Dr. Oz is a charlatan who’s allowed to exist because the vitamin and supplement industry lobbied against FDA oversight and won.
He’s the literal product of corruption.
And Snakeoil
Even the people who pay for insurance don’t have rights either.
Americans have eaten at the garbage pale of ideology for so long, they genuinely believe “rights” really are God Given and self-executing. What does a “right” to health care get you without a public health care system?
Who overrules the hospital administrators that would rather shovel you onto the curb than have the physicians in their employee extend you care? Who overrules the AMA when it caps the number of licenses to provide or schools to issue those licenses or lobbies to limit the number of medical centers capable of providing care?
Health care has to come from somewhere. Doctors need training. Offices need equipment. X-Ray machines need electricity. Patients need a place they can go to receive care. As folks from the UK to Cuba to Gaza have discovered, if you’re denied the resources to provide the health care you have a right to, it isn’t worth much.
The obvious answer is that Medicare for All would be a great place to start in the USA. If not that, then laws limiting the ridiculous profits of insurance companies and regulating payouts would be another option, combined with some kind of Medicare for the poor that is better than the current Medicaid bullshit they have available.
Most of all, ensuring that doctors rather than insurance companies are deciding the care plan would save many lives per year.
Insurance companies should be forced to be nonprofits.
Edit: I mean we should have MfA but at the least hospitals and insurance companies should be nonprofit.
That wouldn’t work because there is no regulation. It’s very easy to spend all profits on stock buybacks and say you’re now non profit
Nonprofits are non stock issuing; since there are no shares, they can’t have any buybacks.
…I mean we should have MfA…
Yes, and I agree, but I don’t see how Multi factor Authentication enters into this argument…
Haha well we should have 2Factor but I just meant Medicare for All
Nonprofits also act like for-profits, for example giving absurd salaries to the C suite, planning luxury retreats as business trips, hiring friends as consultants and paying expensive compensation for nothing, and so on
I saw many “cancer research” non profits that waste most of donations in bullshit and then give what’s left to actual research grants
Yes this can happen, though it should be noted that a nonprofit health insurer would be regulated differently than a nonprofit research institute that isn’t responsible for providing or reimbursing care.
There can be corruption in governments and government programs too — but still the data says they do a better job at optimizing public health than for profit environments. Not letting perfect be the enemy of good, or better, it’s pretty clear from what I can gather that non profit is better than for profit, and optimized single payer is better than both of those.
Most hospitals are nonprofits.
So are several large health insurance companies, such as Blue Cross Blue Shield and Kaiser Permanente.
Guess what: nonprofits deny care too. So do single-payer health care systems.
I’m not suggesting it’s perfect — I’m suggesting it’s better. I’m suggesting optimizing a healthcare system around profit instead of population level health measures shouldn’t be done. I’m not suggesting that making things be non profit or single payer will magically resolve all issues, only that it will be better.
OK, but you can already find health care that is not optimized around profit. Just sign up for BCBS (which is available in most places) and choose a nonprofit medical center as your PCP (which are easy to find since they greatly outnumber for-profit medical centers).
I suspect you may find that this leads to slightly higher premiums. After all, one of the reasons UHC denies so many claims is to keep their premiums low. But in health care, you generally get what you pay for.
Not all BCBS plans are nonprofit actually. And most comparisons I can find for nonprofit medical facilities show lower costs. I haven’t found many studies on pure on profit health insurance vs for profit insurance, but I did find a Harvard paper which compared specifically BCBS plans that converted from non profit to for profit, and here’s an excerpt from that:
Looping back to the theoretical models of NFP and FP health care organizations, the findings are consistent with models in which NFPs prioritize enrollment over profits (equivalently, models in which FPs prioritize profits over enrollment). While theoretically this difference in emphasis might not manifest in higher premiums or lower quality because FPs could be more efficient and find it optimal to maintain substantially the same premiums and quality as NFPs (and still reap higher profits via lower operating costs and/or medical expenses), empirically we do find there is a tradeoff: consumers face higher premiums when large NFPs convert to FP status. Although we do not directly study quality, we find no indirect evidence of quality improvements, as inferred from a model of employee healthplan choice. Moreover, we do find evidence that rivals of converting plans experienced sizeable increases in medical spending following conversion, a result that suggests FPs are likelier than NPs to engage in risk selection practices (e.g., denying or deterring enrollment of individuals with poor health or high health risk, a practice that was legal during the study period).
Here NP is nonprofit, FP is for profit, and NFP is not for profit. Bold emphasis is mine. You can read the study here:
So I would find actually the opposite of what you said, in aggregate, according to this study. Secondly, I still argue for expanded Medicaid and a public option / single payer. I’ve worked with large population datasets from US and internationally — invariably the health outcomes and monitoring, quality of data and followup, are all better for single payer systems.
I like the AOC idea of rapidly decreasing the Medicare age until it hits zero.
As folks from the UK to Cuba to Gaza have discovered, if you’re denied the resources to provide the health care you have a right to, it isn’t worth much.
Fun fact: two of those three have far better outcomes than the US for profit system and the last one likely would if not for the US government supplying the bombs and political cover to destroy it.
Basically all you’ve managed to prove is that you’re ignorant about the quality and availability of health care in other countries and will compare for profit healthcare to genocide and ethnic cleansing in order to make it look good.
They’re right about the God given rights thing though. People really heard God given and thought that meant nobody could take them away.
That’s why I never used that silly phrase. Rights aren’t given to you by a magical sky daddy. They’re given by and enforced by mutual agreement between people who won’t put up with their friends and neighbors being treated unfairly.
Are you a Bit dumb or just pretending to be?
All of this can be solved with Legislation, and even the shittiest place in the UK has better health Outcomes and Life Expectancy than the average US Citizen
All of this can be solved with Legislation
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Belling_the_Cat
A great idea that nobody can accomplish isn’t so great.
Well all other developed Nations have figured it Out and achieve significantly better Outcomes than the richest Counties in the US.
https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamainternalmedicine/fullarticle/2774561
Maybe Just Accept that you are wrong
What is happening to life expectancy in England?
There have been two turning points in trends in life expectancy in England this century. From 2011, increases in life expectancy slowed after decades of steady improvement, prompting much debate about the causes. Then, in 2020, the Covid-19 pandemic was a more significant turning point, causing a sharp fall in life expectancy, the magnitude of which has not been seen since World War II.
The UK government is heavily captured by American finance and tech. They’re plunging down to our level quickly, despite the NHS (which they state is rapidly defunding and privatizing).
Canada, Germany, and Japan all have the same problems. They’re gutting their golden geese.
Developed nations did figure it out two generations ago, but have since forgotten in the fog of profit chasing and growth for the sake of Big Number Go Up.
America Last. WTF, the Government of Putin wants an epidemic to break out. How many people in the red run welfare counties would be affected by Dr. Oz’s plan? Indeed, a shit ton and they voted for it.
I’ll make it much simpler to understand. The only thing putin wants. Is America out of the way. Whatever form that takes. So that he can pursue his plans in Eurasia.
He really has talent in choosing all his picks. “Ummm who could be the worst person ever to fill this role?”
Every one of those terrible picks has been a deliberate, careful choice to destabilize the country.
Except the NASA guy. He’s probably pretty good. But his job is to funnel contracts (and therfore billions of dollars) to spacex.
Anyone decent will be fired for not doing terrible things or quit because there’s too much pressure to do the terrible things (cf Trump’s first term). Most of them are happy to do the terrible things this go round, though, because they were identified in advance for being willing to do the terrible things.
Why should only the military pay for overpriced stuff they don’t need?
Being serious, it seems like he picked his people from a couple of pools.
- Republicans with a lot of social media clout.
- People plausibly accused of being Russian agents.
Don’t forget name-recognition (even outside the social media spheres.) When’s the last time so many cabinet picks were names the average American already knew? It’s not like we’re the most informed group of people. Yet out of all the millions of people in the United States, what are the chances that the best people for these jobs are ones the public has already heard of?
Trump has gotten as far as he has by treating his own name like a brand. It’s not surprising that he prefers to associate with others who’ve done the same.
They do in other modern countries. Oh wait, except they don’t have “uninsured” people. If your government can’t guarantee you basic things like clean air and water, protection, health… what the fuck are you paying taxes for!?
More lanes for more roads, because more lanes will definitely fix gridlock
More of them, but no plan or resources towards maintaining them
what the fuck are you paying taxes for!?
dead brown kids!
Dont forget the billionaires!
Luigi didn’t.
This needs to be on a Billboard across the south.
Just think: you all did the right thing, holding your nose at the polls, voting for Fetterman to block Oz. And now you have both of them.
Brain damage causes conservatism.
Nah, I probably have some decent brain damage and am solidly progressive.
Same here. My brain injury made me even more radical. If anything has me wondering if I’ve gone paranoid and insane seeing all this coming danger while the rest of the world just goes about their business.
Hmm yeah fair point, I’m in the same boat.
Proposed amendment: enough brain damage causes conservatism.
We better lay off the concussions, got it haha
Life, uh, finds a way…
Lol ah the American Dream.
Not fucking happy about it. Worst possible outcome.
Somebody call Luigi.
He’s tied up.
Nah, we talking about the real Luigi
Waluigi
WARLUIGI
Single payer healthcare is so complex to implement that only 22 of the 23 most developed countries in the world have done it.
The US system is grotesque.
The US system is state sanctioned terrorism of the civilian population by the plutocracy, for profit.
Part of the problem for the US is that such a huge amount of gdp is buried in the masses of beauracracy that makes up the US healthcare system, it’s essentially acting (economically) as proxy government spending to prop up a failing economy. The average US citizen is so heavily propaganda’d into hating government run projects that the sensible economic stimulus (government infrastructure projects or public services) are well and truly off the table.
What this ultimately means is fixing healthcare isn’t just breaking up the cartels, preventing price fixing and untangling the web of nonsense that makes up the US private system… unless you want to inspire a massive crash (which absolutely has real human cost), it also means redistributing government spending and implementing (unrelated) government run services and/or projects to keep all these people employed (which would also mean re-training and potentially relocating) - all of which needs to be done against the overwhelmingly loud voices screeching “government employee bad”.
While I agree with the sentiment (where this should be the case), this isn’t actually true for some of these countries.
Australia, for example, though not sure if we’re included in this 23, we have a private system also.
For all emergency care, it’s single-payer. Private health insurance / private hospitals are not permitted to provide emergency care, nor out of hospital car, but all other hospital care is allowed (I am simplifying, as I’m not super clear on it either). Further, private health insurance is not allowed to cover things that Medicare doesn’t at least also partially cover.
Sounds good right? Sounds like private health is kept in check? I mean, sort of, but it’s still really profitable, and you even get a tax break.
What it doesn’t stop, is prices getting higher and you having to cover the difference because health care employees are not necessarily employed by the stat, and can set their own prices (which is either covered by private insurance in hospital, or out-of-pocket outside hospital as private can’t cover that).
If you don’t have private health, you often have to wait way longer in the public system for non-emergency (but still medically necessary) care, like hip replacements, eye surgery etc.
It’s kinda fucked, everyone ought to be in the same queue, and if things are taking too long well then gee, I dunno, pay more / hire more / train more doctors, this doesn’t take a genius to figure out.
Healthcare should be provided by the state, in-full, covered by taxes. We (and the US for that matter) have plenty of tax revenue to cover this. And if you’re feeling really frisky, perhaps very slightly increase corporate taxes and tax breaks for the wealthy.
So we now have a two tiered system, where the wealthy get care first, or whoever can afford to pay. And you even get a tax break for it.
The US system is trash, and ours is utopian by comparison, but let’s not pretend like all 22 of 23 countries have true, universal healthcare.
We don’t, let’s aim higher haha
Just wish the US would get a universal healthcare system like every freaking other developed country in this world. Will never happen. Ugh.
Nah, the Republicans would rather see you spend twice as much per capita (the whole population!) to cover a third of the population via public insurance and then get you guys to then spend money on private insurance and then have to pay any time you need any care.
You know… Fiscal responsibility…
To be fair Kamala was also against Medicare for All
EDIT: Y’all need to learn to Google basic shit before rage downvoting facts you don’t like: https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/how-kamala-harris-ditched-medicare-for-all/
Ah yes, the two parties. Republicans and Kamala.
Maybe you weren’t aware of this, but Kamala was the Democrat’s nominee for president. Which is the highest office in the government.
Can you show me all the primary results to back up your claim?
… really?
I don’t think they do, judging by the downvotes.
Yes only the Republicans have a leader they listen to and built a platform on. Harris had no influence on her policy choices!
As was “nothing will fundamentaly change” Biden. Corporate whores to their very core.
Pretty sure she supports it, as she did 4 years ago, but her campaign told her not to show support for it in order to court the Republicans that were on the fence.
but her campaign told her not to show support for it in order to court the Republicans that were on the fence.
Seems like they told her to do that with a lot of things.
womp womp.
I’m holding out hope that the Democrats decide to court Democrats, but based on the past few elections I don’t have very high hopes.
Democrats: taking votes for granted that they shouldn’t be taking for granted since forever.
Correction: Taking intelligence and empathy for granted that they shouldn’t be taking for granted, since basically social media started being a thing.
So she’s a spineless liar? That’s worse.
They adopted a strategy, it didn’t work.
Welcome to politics, you don’t always defend what you believe in.
So she’s both a spineless liar and lacks substantive values? Voters who like that kind of candidate voted for Trump. Predictably. Welcome to politics.
If you don’t support it during the campaign then you don’t get to say you secretly supported it later.
They hated ACD for telling the truth.
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/how-kamala-harris-ditched-medicare-for-all/
This page doesn’t exist or can’t be found.
Ah, Jacobin. Of course. The ones who said housing the homeless is not good, because it means landlords will get paid.
Can’t wait to read their thoughts on health care. Let me guess: “Universal health care now, but not if corporations benefit too”.
Wish granted. The government is now responsible for paying whatever premiums the health insurance companies demand. But everyone with a social security number is covered.
There’s a way of dealing with insurance company CEOs who aren’t good people don’t worry
It will happen, we just haven’t fought hard enough for it yet.
If everyone just said fuck it and stopped paying their insurance, it would crash not just those companies, but domino into taking out the entire stock market.
Like, these companies are worth so much, and they invest in others and people invest in them. If their entire revenue stream is stopped at once that’s it.
Which makes it kind of a nuclear option, one I’ve intentionally not mentioned and haven’t seen anyone else either.
But the day may be coming
Corporations mainly pay for health insurance. Imagine employee’s reactions being told they were getting cut off. Not going to happen.
If the employee cancels their plan, the corp ain’t going to keep paying.
I don’t know why someone would read my comment and imagine I meant corporations should cancel their employees insurance…
But I think that’s what happened here
We don’t get to drop out of plans at a whim.
I’m on VA, so I admittedly don’t know much.
But to my knowledge marketplace can be cancelled at any time, thru employer may only be certain times.
But I do know you can stop any non court ordered payroll deduction at any time…
Some dumbasses even do it for OASDI and tax withholding and then act shocked when they get the bill at end of year.
You have a point I missed!
Interesting idea, but you’d need to get employers on board. Many of whom are publicly traded companies.
When someone stops paying their insurance, they stop getting healthcare. Most people don’t want that.
It’s kind of like saying “If everyone said fuck it and set their car on fire, then oil companies would suffer”. Yes, but they aren’t the only ones who would suffer.
When someone stops paying their insurance, they stop getting healthcare.
When people pay their insurance, they don’t get healthcare either.
No, they generally do get health care. In fact, most insured adults give their health insurance an overall rating of “excellent” or “good”, even if they are in poor health.
It’s true that there are horror stories, but those are not the majority.
Which is why there was so much sympathy for the UHC CEO and why his killer is universally hated.
29% of people have “very unfavorable” views of Luigi Mangione, compared to only 13% of Brian Thompson. The vast majority believe his murder was not justified.
It sure is neat seeing under which circumstances lemmy regards polls as reliable.
Were you one of the Lemmy users who thought Trump was “universally hated”? If so, you were in for a big surprise there too.
Reading the rest of the survey makes me belive that americans either don’t know what a good insurance company looks like or that they must lie to themselves
Which is exactly why we’ll never have single payer: It would crash the economy and put millions out of work.
Downvote me all you want but it’s the exact reason Obama gave for not pushing single payer
I’m not sure how that puts people out of work? Still need people to process the claims, they would just work for the government vs the company. Which for them would probably be better long term getting federal benefits and retirement.
It’s only a couple companies at this point. There’s been so many members over the years. Economy would be fine. We probably had more tech layoffs this year than would lose their job from closing these leeches
But that would go against small govt and the GOP cannot let that slide.
I always figured a great deal of those people would move to government work. They already have the expertise.
The problem is that there are large parts of those companies that are replicated multiple times that would be made redundant.
Each company has an IT department, legal department, marketing department, and claims department, among a lot else. Most of those would be redundant or unnecessary in a single payer system.
Part of the reason single payer is more cost effective is eliminating administrative overhead. And “administrative overhead “ is code for jobs.
Any job that gets between a patient and the care they need is a job that needs to die.
No doubt. I’m an antiwork radical and think nobody should have a job. But the one thing both political parties and the public seem to agree on is “more jobs” so anyone who says “less jobs” isn’t going to get elected.
And what will you do with all these unemployed people?
Checkmate, guys. We can’t endanger some jobs in order to help everyone. Sorry. Guess we’ll just keep doing this failure of a system that keeps a few rich from the rest of us struggling.
No answer huh? I’ll send a million beggars to your doorstep. Jesus Christ you people are children. Can we actually talk about how this works?!
And that seems logical! But we’ve talked about combining the local city and county for cost savings. Turns out, it wouldn’t be too big a deal.
Not like if we doubled the population we’d need the same amount of people approving construction planning. We’d pretty much need double. And that’s one of 1,000 examples.
But you’re spot on with admin overhead! That would indeed drop. Not by half, as in my example, but it would certainly drop. The biggest drop would be profit. And we can all agree healthcare shouldn’t run like private enterprise.
I’m totally with you. Yes, got single-payer would slash thousands and thousands of jobs, maybe a million or three. And yes, that would fucking hurt. It’s like the Obama quotes you posted. We didn’t start on a level playing field, we started in a ditch.
Lemmy hates our sort of discourse. “NO! It’s all very simple! Why won’t you talk simple!”
I’m 100% on board with Medicare for all and have been since 2016. I’m just trying to recognize logistical and political speedbumps
Lemmy: NO! SIMPLE ONLY!
You’re fighting an uphill battle.
How?
For the same reason not paying our insurance will crash the economy: Big parts of it would go out of business.
The obvious solution is to put a plan into place to transition to a new system over time. There’s no reason it has to come all at once, unless there’s a viable way to do that without collapsing markets.
The conclusion to any problem is never, and should never, be “Welp! The problem is too big to fix now! Guess we’ll just leave it as it is!”. Every problem has a solution. Most problems have more than one.
Further than that, as a recently unemployed working class person who was paycheck to paycheck before my freelance gigs dried up a month and a half ago (slow season started early this year), fuck the stock market. Why should I worry about the extractors losing money when they have already created a system in which, through no lack of effort on my part, I have nothing left to lose. I’m in the top 10% of technicians in my city, in a very niche field, in one of the largest cities in the US, and I can’t afford my bills because my industry is dominated by a single monopoly. Anyone who doesn’t serve the monopoly directly either serves it indirectly, or feeds on its scraps. Small company owners (I’ve worked with many) justify paying people just slightly more than the starvation wages the monopoly doles out. Unions are gaining ground, but it’s very slow progress and they haven’t really expanded far beyond entry level positions yet, which I leveled out of well over a decade ago.
Fuck the stock market. Fuck the rich. Why should I care about them when all they do is extract?
I don’t disagree with you but I do not believe our government is capable of a decade-long transition to single payer.
Why not? All they have to do is make a single payer option available. Make it functional and accessible, and people will switch to it as their current insurance policies end, or when they move to their next job. The health insurance stock market will likely initially dive, then stabilize into a long downward slope. I’m sure the feds have all kinds of “quantitative-easing” tools they can use to make the process less painful for the ownership class. Whatever pain they do feel would be a necessary consequence of the wrongs they have committed being made right.
Is “the economy” code for how hard you can fuck yourself in the ass with no lube?
“The economy” is code what for every single fucking one of us participates in. This notion that the economy only applies to the rich is sophomoric, and I’m being generous calling it that.
So every other country with universal healthcare just doesn’t exist or?
And that has what to do with what? Cute quip though.
If we remove a million+ jobs, yes, that will fuck shit up. Y’all have an 8th-grade understanding of the world. Upvotes means you’re right, downvotes bad.
As to what OP posted, it’s like Obama said, we’re not starting on a level playing field, we’re starting in a ditch. Other countries started healthcare after WWII, did the right thing, for many reasons I won’t go into here.
Sorry, forgot where I was.
“SIMPLE ANSWER GOOD!”
I don’t know why I’m getting grief for agreeing with OP that eliminating health insurers would crash the economy.
To me this is fine but most people won’t like it which is why single payer won’t ever happen without a revolution.
Is not liking it the same as crashing the economy?
-
Privatize ALL the health insurance companies.
-
Reduce inefficiencies (fire all the parasites that don’t do actual work, like the CEO’s, etc)
-
Continue operations as normal, but now with 100% guaranteed claim coverage.
-
Over time, phase out the need for people to “deal with insurance” at all and make the whole thing transparent.
-
I’m not suggesting you’re wrong, but isn’t there an obvious inefficiency here that reduces the standard of care provided?
Like if a national healthcare system doubles the number of administrators involved, there will be less money available for actual health stuff.
Yes, and the inefficiency of private health insurance creates thousands of jobs and powers a $2.2 trillion industry.
The stock market has survived fire sales before and it will survive it again. Oops we got too large to easily stop has never been cause for anything except getting the stick out and beating them down to size.
Surely people will have better access to health care once the system has “crashed”!
Well yeah? Once it crashes you can rebuild it properly.
Well, the people who survive can rebuild it as they see fit, anyway.
I have no reason to think that the general public will suddenly be more organized than the surviving oligarchs.
If only the oligarchs survive, they’ll quickly die off from having nobody to actually keep the world running.
This is one thing that really scares me about automation and AI. Without a doubt, they will replace as many of the functions that humans are responsible for with automation and software as is possible. Once they have things up and running, there’s nothing stopping them from doing whatever they want and not caring about the human cost.
A big salty tear.
Oz went on to explain that most people have misread the Constitution and Bill of rights, people can have life OR liberty OR the pursuit of happiness. Only the rich will get all three…
It’s an interesting perspective on a phrase that literally says “Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of Happiness”.
FFS, this guy thinks it’s a prix fixe menu!
Funny because you can only pursue liberty or pursue happiness when dead. Almost like the afterlife, religion is an instrument of class oppression
Ha ha ha. Pop pop pop.
Behind the bastards podcast on this piece of shit.
