anaccountnow

How Much Can US Health Care Progress If Donald Trump Allows More Money to Invest?

Recommended Posts

Sorry for my English. I can imagine much more progress. I think medicine is being neglected. Taking into account what radical changes were made during Donald Trump's function, more pressure is needed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've started three replies to this (four now), but I can't get past this, what makes you think Trump has any interest in the health of others?

He's alright, Jack...

The only thing he has invested in this, is his need to get revenge on Obama; phuq everyone else... 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The US has the highest health care expenditures per capita of any country in the World. (twice that of Canada)

The neglect is in the distribution of it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, J.C.MacSwell said:

The US has the highest health care expenditures per capita of any country in the World. (twice that of Canada)

The neglect is in the distribution of it.

That's not neglect, it's business.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, dimreepr said:

I've started three replies to this (four now), but I can't get past this, what makes you think Trump has any interest in the health of others?

He's alright, Jack...

The only thing he has invested in this, is his need to get revenge on Obama; phuq everyone else... 

I do not think so. I never said that. I will be glad if you read carefully before answering. That he does not care, I took into consideration before I started this discussion.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
5 minutes ago, anaccountnow said:

I do not think so. I never said that. I will be glad if you read carefully before answering. That he does not care, I took into consideration before I started this discussion.

I will be glad too, but you first (if you read/write carefully before you post), the OP makes little sense; why else would I compose three replies, before I click "Submit Reply"?

Edited by dimreepr

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
6 minutes ago, dimreepr said:

I will be glad too, but you first, the OP makes little sense; why else would I compose three replies, before I click "Submit Reply"?

What doesn't make sense to you? LOL. You say he's not interested in the health of others. It doesn't matter that much. However, if he wants to secure another election in the next elections, it would be ideal to set certain criteria for him.

Edited by anaccountnow
words

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The problem is not money: as noted, the US spends far more than any other country to provide a far wore service. The insurance companies pay more the UK National Health Service (per head). And then the US government also pays about the same again.

The problem is structural. The system is designed for the benefit (profit) of health insurers and providers, not to provide treatment where needed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, anaccountnow said:

However, if he wants to secure another election in the next elections, it would be ideal to set certain criteria for him.

What makes you (given the context :rolleyes:) think this makes any more sense than the OP? :doh:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, dimreepr said:

That's not neglect, it's business.

Business just follows the path toward profit, or at least attempts to, in the most efficient manner.

Change the rules and you change that path...for better or worse outcomes, depending on how well you do it, and what your goals are.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, J.C.MacSwell said:

Business just follows the path toward profit, or at least attempts to, in the most efficient manner.

The thing about profit in business is 'I don't care'.

We all follow a path but in my opinion the word profit benefits us all, not just I...

9 minutes ago, J.C.MacSwell said:

Change the rules and you change that path...for better or worse outcomes, depending on how well you do it, and what your goals are.

Do you really think Trump gives a shit either way? 

All he wants to do is win...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, dimreepr said:

The thing about profit in business is 'I don't care'.

We all follow a path but in my opinion the word profit benefits us all, not just I...

I was obviously using a more restrictive definition...the most common for business.

Your definition is closer to the "better outcomes" I referred to.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, dimreepr said:

What makes you (given the context :rolleyes:) think this makes any more sense than the OP? :doh:

 

23 minutes ago, dimreepr said:

What makes you (given the context :rolleyes:) think this makes any more sense than the OP? :doh:

You're annoying me. I don't want to offend anyone right away but you're pissing me off. Ever since I signed up here, I've come across you up  everywhere I was. You put embarrassing emojis here and you act like you're the smartest man on Earth. I guess you have nothing to do. You don't have a job. You sit at home and write on this forum. Americans were against illegal migration to the US. Trump had the same view and that is one of the reasons why he was elected president. A big problem has been solved and it is time to solve the next one and focus on it. Invest more time and money. Any candidate who wants to win the next election will have to come up with an argument. People want better health the same way they wanted  more work and less migrants in their country. That doesn't make sense to you?  :doh: :doh: :doh: :doh: You're an idiot and I'm out of this forum! I won't read again.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, J.C.MacSwell said:

Your definition is closer to the "better outcomes" I referred to.

Do you really think that's possible in a Trump administration?

3 minutes ago, anaccountnow said:

You're an idiot

Probably...

3 minutes ago, anaccountnow said:

and I'm out of this forum! I won't read again.

Thank you???

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, J.C.MacSwell said:

Business just follows the path toward profit, or at least attempts to, in the most efficient manner.

Change the rules and you change that path...for better or worse outcomes, depending on how well you do it, and what your goals are.

This is the key. Right now, insurance money (which the taxpayer has paid) and tax subsidies (which the taxpayer has paid) are being based on maximum profit like any growth business model. The problem is that healthcare needs to be aimed at caring for people's health in order to be effective. In the US, the focus on profit allows businesses to leech away funds that the taxpayer needs.

One example among many is durable medical devices. Businesses are allowed to create monopolistic deals with doctors offices for oxygen, blood, and sleep devices. There's no competition for them with your provider, so you have no choice when they fail to provide their services, or overbill, or send the wrong filters/tubes/parts. They learned this from the cable TV giants, who similarly have no competition within their protected areas. Customer service becomes a big joke (google Apria Healthcare or Comcast customer service and look at the comments!).

We definitely need a more European attitude about spending on social requirements (which I feel healthcare is). In the US, we let capitalism build the paths our socialism takes, and wonder why all our money gets leeched away.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, Phi for All said:

We definitely need a more European attitude about spending on social requirements (which I feel healthcare is). In the US, we let capitalism build the paths our socialism takes, and wonder why all our money gets leeched away.

+1. 

To me the "we" is often lobbied politicians.

The rules should be for the benefit of the public, where business is used as a tool to get those better outcomes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, J.C.MacSwell said:

The rules should be for the benefit of the public, where business is used as a tool to get those better outcomes.

Indeed, but what makes that happen? Lobbies or social rule?

I get where your coming from, left/right are both correct, so the logical root is neither and both; the variable is context. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
59 minutes ago, J.C.MacSwell said:

The rules should be for the benefit of the public, where business is used as a tool to get those better outcomes.

Quite frankly, I think many of our problems would evaporate if we removed private influence from public programs wherever possible. Without the market to keep profits based on competition, quality, and service, private interests are free to do the least to gain the most. And publicly-funded endeavors can only stay true to their goals when they aren't focused on making an individual or business wealthy. I want to see unsubsidized private interests competing in a fair market under progressive taxation so they invest to avoid the highest brackets, coupled with a citizenry aided by powerful social programs to ensure prosperity and participation in that fair market. 

Healthcare insurance is a concept designed for profit only, imo. Insure your car, or home, or life, and you can put a price tag on it and we can all agree on what it's worth. It's practically impossible to do that with health in an equitable manner. Members of a modern society should demand better.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Phi for All said:

We definitely need a more European attitude about spending on social requirements (which I feel healthcare is). In the US, we let capitalism build the paths our socialism takes, and wonder why all our money gets leeched away.

The Japanese model would be better for America I reckon. It's just as advanced, although their mental health treatment is dated.

IMG_1641.PNG.fb54ad789430e410f742bcd5930e2a7c.PNG

.... The care system in Japan provides healthcare services, including screening examinations, prenatal care and infectious disease control, with the patient accepting responsibility for 30% of these costs while the government pays the remaining 70%.......All residents of Japan are required by the law to have health insurance coverage......Hospitals, by law, must be run as non-profit and be managed by physicians. For-profit corporations are not allowed to own or operate hospitals. Clinics must be owned and operated by physicians.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Health_care_system_in_Japan

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, dimreepr said:

Do you really think that's possible in a Trump administration?

 

Yes. 

But much more plausible in a Yang administration.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now