A suggestion for single-payer advocates

[ccr1138.livejournal.com]

I have a friend who is a pediatrician and a strong advocate for government-run, single-payer health insurance. To her and all her friends who have formed an organization to fight for socialized medicine, I say this:

If you truly believe in single payer, why not set up your practice now so you ONLY take Medicaid patients? This is a serious suggestion; I’m not trying to be snide. Medicaid patients have an extremely difficult time finding doctors because the government doesn’t pay very much for those services. But if we went to single-payer, EVERYBODY would be like a Medicaid patient. If you truly think that’s best, and you’re willing to take lower compensation for your work for the public good, why not start now? You could significantly reduce your paperwork and staff requirements because you wouldn’t have to hassle with all the different providers. It would be a win/win, and it would be ethically consistent with your stance against private insurance.

My doctor in Canada said he received $8 for a patient visit. That’s Canadian dollars, mind you. Do you think that would work for you?

Comments

[merig00.livejournal.com]

See you have a fault in your logic. You are comparing current system to a Single Payer. What you need to do, and what is complicated, is to compare single payer to a free market system.

[mijan.livejournal.com]

Fundamental problem with free market system: It doesn't matter if you're rich or poor - cancer treatment costs the same for everyone. Maybe some people have a "sink or swim" mentality about that, but I don't think affordability of life-saving medical care should be the test of "survival of the fittest."

Free market with no regulation might be the cheapest, but some of us still value a level of society-level compassion.

But if you truly feel that if the child in a poor family is struck with leukemia that she only deserves the care her family can afford, out-of-pocket, then go ahead and be the heartless rat. I believe in a higher standard of human compassion. And no, I don't trust "the church" or other private charities to distribute funds to all those who need it.

[merig00.livejournal.com]

Well I do believe in charities... Americans give out something around 300 billion dollars each year in charity. You can build a country on charity, dedication and hard work, prime example - Israel.

This is another reason why I dislike current administration, neither Obama or Biden know what charity is.

[dwer.livejournal.com]

neither Obama or Biden know what charity is.

(http://s744.photobucket.com/albums/xx81/drewishdrewid/?action=view&current=roflbot-uChB.jpg)

[merig00.livejournal.com]

According to their tax returns, in 2006 and 2007, the Obamas gave 5.8 percent and 6.1 percent of their income to charity. The Bidens gave 0.15 percent and 0.31 percent of the income to charity.

Meanwhile, in 1991, 1992 and 1993, George W. Bush had incomes of $179,591, $212,313 and $610,772. His charitable contributions those years were $28,236, $31,914 and $31,292. During his presidency, Bush gave away more than 10 percent of his income each year.

For purposes of comparison, in 2005, Barack Obama made $1.7 million -- more than twice President Bush's 2005 income of $735,180 -- but they both gave about the same amount to charity.

That same year, the heartless Halliburton employee Vice President Dick Cheney gave 77 percent of his income to charity. The following year, in 2006, Bush gave more to charity than Obama on an income one-third smaller than Obama's.

[dwer.livejournal.com]

it's funny, because it fails to take into account how much money Bush & Cheney made before they become Co-Presidents.

[ccr1138.livejournal.com]

Because it's not relevant. We're talking percentages here. If Republicans are supposed to be heartless, minority-hating scrooges and Democrats care for the downtrodden, why is it that Republicans give such a greater share to charity?

I have a theory that certain liberals create laws to force people to donate to social programs because they, themselves, won't give unless compelled to.

[dwer.livejournal.com]

got any other bullshit theories you wanna spout?

Want percentages?

[telemann.livejournal.com]

Well let's have a real apples to apples comparison, say Mr. Cheney before he became Vice President to Joe Biden. One running large corporations in the private sector with a Senator making a lot less money. A lot less. That seems fair, n'cest pas?

When Vice President Dick Cheney was campaigning in 2000, he defended his family's charitable donations of $209,832, or about 1%, of the $20.6 million he earned from 1989 to 1999. "It's a private matter … a matter of private choice," Cheney said in 2000. Last year, Cheney and his wife, Lynne Cheney, donated more than $166,000 to charity, or about 5.5% of their income, according to the Chronicle of Philanthropy.

[ccr1138.livejournal.com]

Also: http://www.usatoday.com/news/politics/election2008/2008-09-12-biden-financial_N.htm

I think it behooves the electorate to know what sort of charitable giving the candidates engage in, not only the amounts but also the organizations they support. Conservatives often advocate shutting down state programs, so I like to see if they contribute more the charity to make up for it. Liberals often advocate taking money from the taxpayers to help the poor and vulnerable, so it helps to know if they put their money where their mouths are, versus simply wanting to confiscate other people's money for the purpose.

[dwer.livejournal.com]

it's funny, because you continue to believe that tax=theft.

[telemann.livejournal.com]

Oh context, my dear chap, is *EVERYTHING*

U.S.A. Today (9/12/2008)
When Vice President Dick Cheney was campaigning in 2000, he defended his family's charitable donations of $209,832, or about 1%, of the $20.6 million he earned from 1989 to 1999. "It's a private matter … a matter of private choice," Cheney said in 2000. Last year, Cheney and his wife, Lynne Cheney, donated more than $166,000 to charity, or about 5.5% of their income, according to the Chronicle of Philanthropy.

Barak Obama did not come from a wealthy family or have business connections via his family like George W. Bush. In 2000, Obama had to borrow money for the airplane ticket to attend the Democratic National Convention in Los Angeles, and when he went to pay for the car rental, his credit card was declined. I'm sure paying for their college loans, raising a family with two young children made it a tough to donate money to charity. To their credit, as the Obama's income increased, so did their donations. The 2008 article noted compared with the two presidential candidates, Biden's income is much more modest. His earnings in the past decade ranged from a high of more than $320,000 in 2005 to a low of $210,797 in 1999.

. Last year [2007], Cheney and his wife, Lynne Cheney, donated more than $166,000 to charity, or about 5.5% of their income, according to the Chronicle of Philanthropy.

What about Senator McCain?

McCain reported giving more than $202,000 — a quarter of his income — to charity in 2006 and 2007, the only years for which his campaign released his tax returns. His campaign didn't release information about his wife's charitable contributions, however. In 2006, her total itemized tax deductions, a category which includes charitable contributions and other deductible items such as mortgage interest, was $569,737, or 9.3% of her income.

To be brutally honest: McCain could afford those donations because of his wife is pretty wealthy. And she is pretty much in the same category of donations as everyone else was before they got elected to the White House, where donations increased.

So the real story here is there is no story.

[mijan.livejournal.com]

Don't even get me started on Israel. Yes, you can build a nation on charity - other nations' charity. I'm half Jewish, lost a lot of relatives in the Holocaust, and even I can recognize Israel (the current political nation) for what it is - an artificial construct.

Also, Israel has UHC. The Wiki summary:

Health care in Israel is both universal and compulsory, and is administered by a small number of organizations with funding from the government. All Israeli citizens are entitled to the same Uniform Benefits Package, regardless of which organization they are a member of, and treatment under this package is funded for all citizens regardless of their financial means. According to a 2000 study by the World Health Organization, Israel has the 28th best health care in the world.

A "Uniform Benefits Package"??? Sounds like evil communist socialism to me! BOOOOOO! HISSSSSS!!!

And explain to me how neither Obama nor Biden know what charity is. Explain that to me. Do you mean that they should provide government funding to religious charities? Please, I'm not quite clear on what you might mean by that.

[merig00.livejournal.com]

Considering that some 60 years ago Israel operated on kibutz system and celebrated Stalin's birthday - they went a long way to where they are now. Also with their amazing system just this year they had to cut down on drugs benefits in order to increase dental coverage. And even with low population they have 2 month waiting periods...

Lower I posted some numbers on Obama and Biden charitable contribution. Bidens dosn't even contribute 1% of their income to charity.
http://community.livejournal.com/talk_politics/455826.html?thread=32366994#t32366994

[mijan.livejournal.com]

And if the Bush and Cheney families weren't already oil tycoons with assets that make the Obamas and Bidens look like paupers, your numbers might make me blink. But the Bush and Cheney families are filthy rich in a way that neither Obama nor Biden has ever dreamed of being, so regardless of what Georgie's and Dick's incomes were during those years, their established fortunes were far greater.

And you still didn't adequately address what I pointed out about Israel - that their health care system is absolutely SOCIALIST. And they rely on socialist contributions from the United States. Oh yes, the USA is happy to give "charity" to other nations so those other countries can afford... (drumroll, please)... UNIVERSAL HEALTH CARE. And yet we won't pay for that for our own citizens.

Hypocrisy at its most disgusting.

[merig00.livejournal.com]

Uhm the only money Israel is getting from USA is to purchase weapons from *gasp* USA. And as I pointed out Israel is moving away from socialism. Look at Europe - they are slowly introducing private options in health care. And only USA is regressing.

[ccr1138.livejournal.com]

Come on. Look at the PERCENTAGES again. Which party gives lip service to helping the poor, and which party actually contributes their own funds to charity? Pathetic.

[dwer.livejournal.com]

this is the sort of flawed thinking that leads people to think that a flat-tax is fair.

[merig00.livejournal.com]

how come?

[merig00.livejournal.com]

Not to me... but I think I know where you are going. I'll gladly read what you have to say.

[allhatnocattle.livejournal.com]

USA was founded on treason and reluctance to pay taxes due.

[ccr1138.livejournal.com]

I agree. I think the founders would have considered charity to be an individual responsibility. I have no proof of that, though. If anyone has actual fact one way or the other, I'd be glad to hear it.