|
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2017 01:38
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 26, 2024 21:49 |
|
|
Jeb! Repetition posted:How would it make millions of health jobs redundant? insurance companies/medical facility billing departments
|
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2017 01:38
|
|
|
Jeb! Repetition posted:How would it make millions of health jobs redundant? A single payer system doesn't need 10 insurance company's worth of billing and coding staff. Most healthcare jobs are in the bureaucracy.
|
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2017 01:40
|
|
|
they can now work at all the small businesses that can afford to open because people couldn't take risks due to needing healthcare
|
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2017 01:41
|
|
|
yeah that's the economic argument that bad dems never make due to their devotion to the healthcare industry - single payer (even at the cost of a slightly boosted medicare tax) would save companies a gently caress load of money
|
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2017 01:42
|
|
|
Concerned Citizen posted:i mean medicare for all will require vastly fewer employees. that's a selling point - it's far more efficient. My wife had to go to the ER the day we got married and thus the day she switched from her old plan to my employers insurance. There was a good amount of money spent between the 2 companies arguing over who had to foot the bill. A single payer system Wouldn't need to employee office monkeys whose job it is to find ways to weasel out of making payments.
|
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2017 01:45
|
|
|
zegermans posted:A single payer system doesn't need 10 insurance company's worth of billing and coding staff. Most healthcare jobs are in the bureaucracy. There would still be plenty of bureaucracy in a single payer system. The jobs would be different and they would move around, but I'm not sure if there would fundamentally be less work. Coding would almost certainly still be a thing. The transition period would require a monumental amount of work and probably create jobs in the short term.
|
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2017 01:46
|
|
|
The Nastier Nate posted:My wife had to go to the ER the day we got married and thus the day she switched from her old plan to my employers insurance. There was a good amount of money spent between the 2 companies arguing over who had to foot the bill. A single payer system
|
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2017 01:48
|
|
|
There are studies showing the US would gain like 2-3 million jobs if everyone had healthcare and the burden was taken off companies but Obama kept talking about how America has a "tradition" of employment-based insurance so that's what we got!
|
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2017 01:49
|
|
|
Tradition is dumb and stupid and why you should always side with Amata in Far Cry 4.
|
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2017 01:50
|
|
|
Rand alPaul posted:There are studies showing the US would gain like 2-3 million jobs if everyone had healthcare and the burden was taken off companies but Obama kept talking about how America has a "tradition" of employment-based insurance so that's what we got! There are so many selling points of a single payer system, but democrats can't give up the handjobs they're constantly getting from health insurance and medical lobbyists so we got legally mandated buy-this-product. How loving thrilled would a company like GM be if they literally never had to pay another dime for healthcare for current and retired employees. Their stock would double overnight. You could even make a conservative argument that it would increase market competitiveness cause start-ups wouldn't have to worry about insuring their new employees, but that's more like 30 years ago conservativism. Today's tea partiers would never see it that way that though.
|
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2017 01:56
|
|
|
The Nastier Nate posted:There are so many selling points of a single payer system, but democrats can't give up the handjobs they're constantly getting from health insurance and medical lobbyists so we got legally mandated buy-this-product well, gm is still going to be paying for healthcare. medicare-for-all is financed with a 6.2% premium paid for by employers, which covers nearly half of the entire system as budgeted for by sanders camp. this system doesn't create money out of nowhere.
|
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2017 01:59
|
|
|
The Nastier Nate posted:How loving thrilled would a company like GM be if they literally never had to pay another dime for healthcare for current and retired employees. Their stock would double overnight. You could even make a conservative argument that it would increase market competitiveness cause start-ups wouldn't have to worry about insuring their new employees, but that's more like 30 years ago conservativism. Today's tea partiers would never see it that way that though. yeah first we're gonna have to get rid of the 60-75% of white people whose largest grievance is that a single dollar of their taxes goes to a serivce provided to black people
|
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2017 02:00
|
|
|
Concerned Citizen posted:well, gm is still going to be paying for healthcare. medicare-for-all is financed with a 6.2% premium paid for by employers, which covers nearly half of the entire system as budgeted for by sanders camp. this system doesn't create money out of nowhere. Me, my son and wife are currently on her plan through her employer, which comes out to roughly a 1/5th of her total compensation. If they could drop that off the rolls and pay the 6.2% instead it would save them a lot of money. The Muppets On PCP posted:yeah first we're gonna have to get rid of the 60-75% of white people whose largest grievance is that a single dollar of their taxes goes to a serivce provided to black people I got nothing for this one.
|
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2017 02:06
|
|
|
Jazerus posted:yeah imo gently caress the self-replicating RNAs that started it all exactly, i remember this conversation 
|
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2017 02:08
|
|
|
I don't know if there's a deeper message in this comic or whatever but I like the idea of trash pandas plotting to take over the world
|
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2017 02:18
|
|
|
The Nastier Nate posted:There are so many selling points of a single payer system, but democrats can't give up the handjobs they're constantly getting from health insurance and medical lobbyists so we got legally mandated buy-this-product. The only time we get to hear talking points about making manufacturing more competitive is when it comes to wage suppression. There's so much wrong with the current political system, and I'm just surprised that the healthcare lobby can bribe more politicians than the manufacturing sector. You'd think large swaths of the business community would be cool with killing the HMOs because it'd help their own bottom line, but I guess there is honor among thieves. The Muppets On PCP posted:yeah first we're gonna have to get rid of the 60-75% of white people whose largest grievance is that a single dollar of their taxes goes to a serivce provided to black people I think the first iteration of Social Security only applied to "working people" in certain industries. It later became universal. Rand alPaul has issued a correction as of 02:34 on Mar 13, 2017 |
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2017 02:30
|
|
|
UHD posted:I don't know if there's a deeper message in this comic or whatever but I like the idea of trash pandas plotting to take over the world But enough about the CSPAM political participation threads
|
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2017 03:17
|
|
|
Vox Nihili posted:next thing you know the government will be forcing you to insure your car as well. absolute madness We're not born with cars.
|
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2017 03:54
|
|
|
Concerned Citizen posted:i agree. there are ways to achieve that, or at least get very close, without single payer. in fact, singlepayer doesn't even guarantee free healthcare. single payer cops = government pays private security firms
|
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2017 04:00
|
|
|
punk rebel ecks posted:
actually private employer-100%-sponsored insurance is more popular than Medicare
|
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2017 04:04
|
|
|
Lastgirl posted:exactly, i remember this conversation during the trump presidency all times become mutable and loop in on one another
|
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2017 04:14
|
|
|
WhiskeyJuvenile posted:actually private employer-100%-sponsored insurance is more popular than Medicare
|
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2017 04:15
|
|
|
Concerned Citizen posted:"medicare for all" is a brand name - the sanders plan doesn't have much in common with actual medicare, which has both premiums (on part b), deductibles, and typically needs supplementary insurance to make healthcare for serious illness actually affordable. the sanders plan is a far more extensive system. I agree. He's a very intelligent man.
|
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2017 04:25
|
|
|
cheese posted:It is garbage and its only popular because the majority of baby boomers have it. I'm a teacher who makes mid 50k a year and my district pays almost 12k a year toward my insurance. Paying 5k more in taxes and getting all that compensation as salary would be a huge boon for the educated professionals that the Democrats serve. sure but good luck taking away something that baby boomers like
|
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2017 04:25
|
|
|
got any sevens posted:We're not born with cars. 
|
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2017 04:29
|
|
|
I'm as much in favor of Single Payer as anyone but no one seriously believes they'd be getting huge raises just because their companies could save a shitload on employee health care, right?
|
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2017 04:31
|
|
|
docbeard posted:I'm as much in favor of Single Payer as anyone but no one seriously believes they'd be getting huge raises just because their companies could save a shitload on employee health care, right? Even if my pay was the same having insurance carry over from job to job so I don't worry about getting sick if I want to try a new job would be nice. That's why companies fight it, they want people afraid to quit. But it bites them in they rear end too, they're stuck with people who aren't bad enough to fire but might not be very good.
|
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2017 04:40
|
|
|
docbeard posted:I'm as much in favor of Single Payer as anyone but no one seriously believes they'd be getting huge raises just because their companies could save a shitload on employee health care, right? Of course not. But any movement which installs single payer is likely bringing back unions, as well.
|
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2017 04:43
|
|
|
got any sevens posted:That's why companies fight it, they want people afraid to quit. But it bites them in they rear end too, they're stuck with people who aren't bad enough to fire but might not be very good. Businesses especially small would benefit from not worrying about providing insurance to their workers. I dont think this matters in right to work states vs at will.
|
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2017 05:43
|
|
|
CheeseSpawn posted:Businesses especially small would benefit from not worrying about providing insurance to their workers. I dont think this matters in right to work states vs at will. Right to Work and At-will employment are two different things and states with one usually have the other, or are in the process of moving towards it. Employer subsidized healthcare falls into the same category as the mortgage interest deduction, and it's to prevent striking.
|
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2017 05:54
|
|
|
Penisaurus Sex posted:Right to Work and At-will employment are two different things and states with one usually have the other, or are in the process of moving towards it. it also prevents people from disrupting the market because no one is willing to take risks that involve endangering the health of their family healthcare is pretty much used as a modern (though way less bad) indentured servitude. it's the single biggest thing preventing employees from giving employers the finger.
|
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2017 06:42
|
|
|
Penisaurus Sex posted:Right to Work and At-will employment are two different things and states with one usually have the other, or are in the process of moving towards it. I thought the MID was just a rich person giveaway?
|
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2017 07:11
|
|
|
Rand alPaul posted:I thought the MID was just a rich person giveaway? David Harvey makes a pretty convincing case that it's an application of the principal that debt incumbent employees don't strike. Renting is one thing, but you're much less likely to strike if you have a mortgage hanging over your (and your family's) head.
|
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2017 08:19
|
|
|
WhiskeyJuvenile posted:sure but good luck taking away something that baby boomers like Trump is doing it everyday and they love him way more than they loved abuela
|
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2017 11:12
|
|
|
Vox Nihili posted:There would still be plenty of bureaucracy in a single payer system. The jobs would be different and they would move around, but I'm not sure if there would fundamentally be less work. Coding would almost certainly still be a thing. there would be less bureaucracy overall that's kind of the point of single payer: having a bunch of different insurance companies inserts a poo poo-ton of unnecessary duplication, division, and general inefficiency into the system for the sole purpose of letting an extra layer of pointless middlemen skim some profits off the top it's real striking that the same people who had no trouble declaring the coal industry dead (Hillary!!!!!!) or calling workers Luddite scum for opposing service/factory automation are real insistent that we can't possibly do anything to hurt the private insurance industry though. there's so many loving layers of classism piled into that
|
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2017 15:35
|
|
|
We take all the parasites currently working in the healthcare bureaucracy, seize their assets to fund Single-payer UHC, then grind them up into a slurry and put them into the recycling tanks. Your welcome america.
|
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2017 15:52
|
|
|
 I hate it when you're right
|
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2017 15:59
|
|
|
Main Paineframe posted:it's real striking that the same people who had no trouble declaring the coal industry dead (Hillary!!!!!!) or calling workers Luddite scum for opposing service/factory automation are real insistent that we can't possibly do anything to hurt the private insurance industry though. there's so many loving layers of classism piled into that who are these people? even in hillary's case, she basically said the coal industry is dying and we need to support those workers, which is true and going to happen regardless of what government did bar massive subsidies. and "classism" is a bizarre attack - insurance industry jobs often have comparable pay to those factory/coal jobs you're talking about, or pay less. no one is giving a poo poo about $200k+/y insurance executives, but rather the legions of medical billers who make $40k/y. 2.5 million people work in the insurance industry, with many hundreds of thousands having no analog to their work in a single payer world. and even if they do, that work isn't likely to exist where they live.
|
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2017 16:11
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 26, 2024 21:49 |
|
|
Concerned Citizen posted:who are these people? even in hillary's case, she basically said the coal industry is dying and we need to support those workers, which is true and going to happen regardless of what government did bar massive subsidies. i think he thinks the people here pointing out that single payer would cost insurance company jobs are worried about keeping those jobs existing, which we aren't
|
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2017 16:30
|
|