How socialized medicine actually works

[JimC]

How paranoid of you. I was merely saying that I am reasonably happy with what happens in my country in terms of health care. I would not want your system here, but I'm not actually part of an international socialist plot to enslave the USA...

[Seth]

How paranoid of you.

It's not paranoia because Socialism is actually out to destroy the United States.

I was merely saying that I am reasonably happy with what happens in my country in terms of health care.

Of course you are because you support enslaving others to your health needs. Of course you have no rational or moral argument to make in support of such thievery and enslavement.

I would not want your system here, but I'm not actually part of an international socialist plot to enslave the USA...

If you support or advocate Socialism, yes, you are.

[Tero]

Seth, it's not necessary to have the last word in every topic. We can just all imagine your comment.

Instructions to Ratz:
Apply this to all Seth started threads.
Seth: Socialism!

[Tero]

Oh yes, and fuck you too. You're welcome!

[Seth]

Seth, it's not necessary to have the last word in every topic. We can just all imagine your comment.

Of course it is. Socialist bilge cannot be allowed to have the last word, ever.

[Tero]

Seth, it's not necessary to have the last word in every topic. We can just all imagine your comment.

Socialism!

:fixed:

[Rum]

Seth just wants to pay £100,000 for the operation the next time he bursts a blood vessel in his brain.

[Seth]

Seth just wants to pay £100,000 for the operation the next time he bursts a blood vessel in his brain.

Better than than be a thief and steal it from other people to serve my personal needs.

By the way, we call that "ethics" and "morals", something that socialists are unfamiliar with.

[Tero]

You lack of knowledge is broad! Not only climate, you don't even understand how insurance works.

[Seth]

You lack of knowledge is broad! Not only climate, you don't even understand how insurance works.

Clearly I understand the whole issue much, much better than you do because you think Obamacare is "insurance." It's not.

Neither is any sort of socialized medicine "insurance."

Insurance is where an individual chooses to voluntarily join a pool of persons facing a particular risk or risks and pays the insurer to cover him against those specific perils. The insurer chooses who may join the risk pool based on its analysis of the perils faced and the actuarial likelihood that any individual member of the pool will cost the insurer more in claims than the insurer gains from the insured's premiums. Insurance is based on the presumption that out of any risk pool a smaller number of members will make claims against the pooled premiums than contribute to the risk pool, and therefore there will be money left over that constitutes operating income and profits for the insurer.

Socialized medicine is not insurance for a number of reasons. First, one is not a voluntary contributor to the risk pool, one is compelled to contribute to the risk pool by law. Second, one does not get to choose which risk pool to join so one cannot control the risk that more people in the pool will make claims against the pool of premiums than members who pay into the pool but do not make claims against it, which eventually leads to bankruptcy of the pool when cash outflow for claims exceeds cash income to the risk pool. Third, the insurer cannot limit the pool only to members it deems likely NOT to make claims against the pool's premium reserves. Fourth, the insurer cannot control the costs of compensating the health care claims because the level of care, along with the compensation to be paid for that care, is fixed by government, not by the markets and risk pools.

Socialized medicine is a Ponzi scheme that relies upon younger, healthier people who are less likely to get sick or injured to pay into the pool which then pays out inordinate amounts of pool money to the old, sick and disabled people, which comprise something like ten percent of the population, who consume some 80 percent of the health care costs. Because the young people are FORCED to pay into the risk pool, and they have no ability to exclude the very sick and feeble from the risk pool in order to mitigate the expense of premiums they must pay to keep the system solvent, this is in no way "insurance," notwithstanding that socialists would like people to think it is because the truth would infuriate those who pay in but never get anything back out of the giant Ponzi scheme that is the NHS.

True health care insurance neither compels anyone to pay into a risk pool nor is the insurer compelled to accept as a pool member absolutely anyone at all, or worse, everyone, no matter how sick they are and how much it's going to cost the risk pool to cover their claims. Insurers control pool expenditures by picking and choosing whom they allow into the risk pool, how much they pay, and what services are covered as compensable risks in order to keep premiums attractively low to attract customers while keeping cash outflow controlled while also providing services that keep risk pool participants happy with their coverage. If they pick the wrong customers, they pay more than they would like. If they don't control costs, they lose money. If they fail to provide service that satisfies the customer, they lose customers and therefore revenues. These free-market pressures keep costs low, premiums low and service high, which results in profits for the investors who provide capital in the expectation of making a profit.

Government-run health care has no profit motive to drive efficiency, cost control or high-quality product because government doesn't have to make a profit and it has unlimited access to the public purse by force of law. If the political winds shift and the public demands more services, government just raises taxes without regard to what doing so does to the economy. If the public doesn't accept additional taxes, then government cuts services in response, often punitively for the refusal of the taxpayers to vote for a tax increase...from which the legions of bureaucrats skim a substantial portion to pay their own salaries, which they get no matter how bad a job they actually do in that position, as the recent Veteran's Administration scandals here prove.

And when the public gets fed up with substandard care but still won't agree to pay more taxes so that the sickest of the sick can get expensive treatments that prolong their lives weeks or months, then the sickest of the sick get thrown under the bus and they are denied their "right to free health care" and are left to die so that they do not impose a burden on the overtaxed and inefficient public health care network. And thus ends the grand "universal health care" scheme that was delusionally doomed from the very beginning and people die as health care is rationed, denied and simply unavailable because it is factually impossible for any society to pay for top-notch medical care for absolutely everyone "for free" without bankrupting the entire society.

[Tero]

There can't be "cheap" healthcare as long as the system works in the current framework. The care providers are a sort of monopoly. So there cantbe 20-80 dollar office visits, they are all about the same. Drug producers hold a monipolyuntil the patent expires. My migraine tablets, off patents, cost 6-7 dollars a tablet. This is dictated by FDA purity, safety, labeling and packing regulations. As well as legal liability. Too many parties all need to be paid.

There is no capitalism solution. It's not like buying a Wal Mart Rake or a best Home Depot rake where the worst thing is that the rake breaks and you get a few splinters.

Health care is expensive for employers, even with a healthy work force. The amount taken out of the paycheck is maybe half the real cost.

Healthcare is actually cost effective for basic care. There is no point denying the low level of care to all citizens. If the huge bureaucracy is taken out (single payer) we can provide cheaper routine care. Not cancer cures or transplants.

There are solutions. Denying care is not one.

[Tero]

Your exaggerated claims are bogus as well:
State by-state reports on premium growth shows that they are rising slower than or equal to historic rates, indicating that the ACA is truly curbing the growth of premiums despite concerns that the new benefits, rights, and protections would lead to premium growth.

• Most young people and low-income Americans can get free or very low-cost, high-quality health insurance through the marketplace.

[Seth]

There can't be "cheap" healthcare as long as the system works in the current framework. The care providers are a sort of monopoly. So there cantbe 20-80 dollar office visits, they are all about the same. Drug producers hold a monipolyuntil the patent expires. My migraine tablets, off patents, cost 6-7 dollars a tablet. This is dictated by FDA purity, safety, labeling and packing regulations. As well as legal liability. Too many parties all need to be paid.

And whose fault is that? TANSTAAFL. Somebody's got to pay or there will be no research and no drugs for you to take.

There is no capitalism solution.

Sure there is. It's called "free market competition" where medical care providers and drug manufacturers compete for market segment by keeping prices low and quality high in order to attract customers. The system fails when the "customer" is the insurance company and not the patient. The insurance company cares only about low prices and little to nothing about quality care. They want the absolute minimum amount of care they can get away with and still convince the insured to pay for the insurance. This is a market-based pressure as well, albeit a less direct one. What happens when the government artificially controls the cost of insurance is that the insurer cuts corners on quality and amount of care so it can make a profit. When the government responds by mandating care amounts and quality to ensure that consumers get what they pay for, insurance companies raise premiums to cover the added costs. When government then dictates the price of premiums to control the costs, insurers simply abandon the industry and medical care becomes unavailable. The same principles apply to the care providers and their suppliers. Any time government tampers with the health care markets the costs to consumers goes up, not down, and the availability of quality care is decreased, not increased.

This is because government cannot force medical suppliers, medical care providers or insurance companies to operate at a loss, so when government interference results in losses, quality and availability of care suffers. It's as inevitable as entropy.

Health care is expensive for employers, even with a healthy work force. The amount taken out of the paycheck is maybe half the real cost.

Healthcare is actually cost effective for basic care. There is no point denying the low level of care to all citizens. If the huge bureaucracy is taken out (single payer) we can provide cheaper routine care. Not cancer cures or transplants.

There are solutions. Denying care is not one.

TANSTAAFL.

Somebody has to pay. The question is who pays for whose care. I prefer to pay for my own care because I can control my medical risks and expenses by paying attention and taking care of myself...or not.

But when you expect me to pay for YOUR medical care, I cannot control your lifestyle choices or your medical needs unless I can control your life, which I doubt you want me to do. And if I cannot control your lifestyle choices to minimize my exposure to the risk of expensive medical care you need that I have to pay for, then, my friend, I'm not going to pay for your medical care. Period. Not a dime. I have my own medical care to deal with so I'll deal with mine and you deal with yours, okay?

You can eat all the Twinkies you want, jump out of perfectly good airplanes, climb mountains, swim in the ocean or skateboard down the hill, but if you get hurt or ill why on earth should I be required to contribute to paying for your medical care? You made the decisions, you got the enjoyment, you must pay the bill and suffer the consequences. You don't get to shove those expenses off on other people using the Mace of State to enforce collection. That's immoral and unacceptable.

If that means you die, well, it sucks to be you I guess, but it's not my problem is it?

[Seth]

Your exaggerated claims are bogus as well:
State by-state reports on premium growth shows that they are rising slower than or equal to historic rates, indicating that the ACA is truly curbing the growth of premiums despite concerns that the new benefits, rights, and protections would lead to premium growth.

No it's not. That's complete horseshit. Health care insurers are simply going out of business and 12 of 14 Obamacare exchanges are nearing bankruptcy already and premium costs to consumers have skyrocketed beyond all predictions.

• Most young people and low-income Americans can get free or very low-cost, high-quality health insurance through the marketplace.

Sure, that somebody else has to pay exorbitant premiums to pay for. Dude, nothing is free. Somebody pays for all that insurance and all that care, or has that fact eluded you?

I qualify for "free" low-income health care, but I absolutely refuse to apply for it because I'm an ethical person who refuses to steal from the young to pay for my medical needs.

[pErvinalia]

Do you ever include source links for these stories?

I've had this argument with him before. Despite being a professed libertarian he seems to have no respect for other's IP. I even started a thread in the feedback forum suggesting this site could get done for plagiarism thanks to Seth. They didn't seem to care too much.