You won’t get far claiming 2 plus 2 is a multiplication problem, braying jackass.
Ok those on the left here is your chance.
- Thread starter Eagle_Eye
- Start date
Those country are all still capitalist. They say they are capitalist countries. Dolt.
OK, so then if we want to emulate those countries by adopting their social policies like single payer health care, what is the big deal?
He won't get far arguing there's a sum under/over 1:1 with anyone who can do 1st. grade math, either.
The sum would be 0 infected if less than 1:1. 1 to 1 is 100% of the other
BZZZZZZTTTTTTT!! No. If the infection rate is less than 1:1, the number of new cases will drop. It will NOT go to zero, at least not initially. Take a remedial math class for Pete's sake.
No big deal. But Bernie wanted medicare for all. Which is different.
It also diminishes the effectiveness of the private market. Even destroys it over time. Its why a lot of Canadians come to the US for procedures.
How so? All M4A does is have the government reimburse your provider instead of an insurance company.
It's a part of the process you aren't involved with at all, that happens after you get your health care.
What exactly does having a private company administer reimbursement to your provider do to enhance or improve the health care you've already had?
How many of them enroll in Aetna or BC/BS when they do?
Eagle_Eye
Well-known member
You can't look at raw numbers and make a statement like that. Let's look at some facts. Comparing two countries closest to us in deaths.
U.S.
.3% infection rate.
5.7 mortality rate.
Italy
.3% infection rate.
13% mortality rate.
Spain
.5% infection rate.
10% mortality rate.
Now I don't know where you went to school but I was taught that comparing the above stats the US did and is doing a great job. Go find something else to whine about.
Less Drs want to use govt reimbursed HC because it has lower payments. Meaning less Drs will go into being a PCP. Meaning HC shortages which we see in Canada and other countries. In the end the care is not as good. You would also need a referral to see a specialist.
So lets say you have bad GERD and you want to see a gastroenterologist. If your DR feels its not serious, you're screwed and will be in pain.
Not sure. I imagine many so their procedure is covered.
Because that is how it appears to break down. The left want to turn this into a major issue tanking the economy in an effort to drag their pathetic candidate across the finish line in November.
The right mostly think this is stupid and enough is enough. Why do you pretend this is something else?
How many people have died solely due to the Virus? ANYONE? Have ANY hospitals been overrun with Covid 19 cases? Where?
How many hospitals have been overrun with Covid cases and deaths? Where?
Your numbers are absurd and stupid. How many people have died solely as a result of this virus and nothing else?
Why don't you tell that to the 40 million Americans losing their jobs and livelihoods? How about the tens and thousands of small businesses that have been bankrupted?
A majority of doctors support Medicare for All.
And lower payments in the context of the chargemaster, which has artificially high costs that the insurer and your provider work out ahead of time so both can benefit financially.
No, you wouldn't need a referral for a specialist because in M4A, there are no more provider networks and you have the choice to see any provider you want. You don't have that choice now; your choice is limited to providers in your network. And you can't just go see a specialist without a referral right now.
You are describing the current system, not M4A.
The irony is that they are bankrupting their own States as a result. 
Hard to have revenue when you close down more than half of your businesses and throw 30 million onto unemployment rolls.