That would be a FORM of the existing ACA...

You over simplify the issue...

Your plan which sounds like you want some different wording in the ACA is still for profit Insurance between the consumer and the doctor (provider)

but in the end you have either a form of ACA or you have a single payer system...

There is no other OPTION...

Private for Profit Insurance...or Medicare for all...

FOR PROFIT Healthcare Insurance needs regulation BECAUSE they will choose profit over the health of their customers EVERY TIME...This is why the ACA was created to avoid going into single payer where politicians would not get paid off from a for profit industry...

Changing the ACA is STILL the ACA...

And the things you think you can simply change can not work the way you want...

You can not remove the mandate (or the penalty for non-compliance) and expect the industry to maintain the pre-existing regulation...

PEOPLE will just wait until diagnosed and then go get insurance that they can not be turned down for...


While I agree the mandate is in my mind unconstitutional...it is the only way address the regulation...

Expanding Medicare to cover all citizens is a much better way to address healthcare...

Service Providers get paid...Billions in profits for an arbitrary middle man are removed....and cost comes down...

The ACA is a Insurance regulation...KEYWORD Insurance...

Medicare for all is the non profit solution to Insurance...

Moving the Healthcare Delivery into non profit is not an option...unless you want VA for all...

Repealing samBROcare will NOT kill a single soul...

You forget that the overwhelming majority of the hospitals in the US are nonprofit organizations. And there are standing orders in FED'RAL legislation that people must be treated regardless of their ability to pay...

Any insinuation that people will be dying in the streets is just f**king ludicrous!

It's a disgrace that we still don't have health care for everybody in this country. Ted Kennedy was working on it as far back as the 70s.

It worked...however inconvenient!

Those other countries have universal health care & they see it as deplorable that the richest country in the world let's our citizens die from things that could have been fixed with preventative care!
???

There are also Children's hospitals not for profit funded by community donations...

But these are not models for solving national healthcare issues...

Cinnamon is FULL OF SHIT ! NO ER would have turned her away ! LIAR !

And every ER is FULL of illegal aliens who will never pay a dime for their care .

I will take your expertise under advisement...

But I still disagree...

When I 'tended grajeate schoo', one of the perfessor's daughters attended medical school. She subsequently married another medical student. They collectively graduated $500,000 in debt. That does NOT include licensing, medical malpractice insurance, start up costs or staffing (which is made even more expensive by being forced to keep insurance paper shufflers on staff). I don't suppose you see the beginning of problem here??!

If a doctor is paid $250,000/year by a nonprofit or $250,000/yr by a for profit, I am still coming up with $250,000/year...

Nonprofit is the ONLY model!

Can you show me where competition has improved health care???

There is more money now than there ever has been in medicine...and the f**king quality is rolling straight down hill like a snow ball headed for hell!

"We need to run more tests"...before we can correctly diagnose the 8" chunk of steel stuck your head...



I have moral objections to gouging sick people!

I did not say it improved healthcare...it does keep cost down (surely you understand when for profits compete prices come down)

You really seem confused on what this "for profit" thing is and isn't.

Not-for-profit is not the same thing as volunteer. The hospitals in every other developed country are not run to make a profit which would then be paid out in dividends to stockholders if they were a for-profit corporation. They have a budget, and they spend that budget on equipment, staff salaries, etc. There is no accumulation of profit, as there is in an American insurance company or HMO.

There are some terrific side-effects of this lack of profit motive. Doctors and nurses have an incentive to cure patients, not to keep them coming back for repeat business. And, of course it's cheaper, because we don't have the layers upon layers of profiteers leeching out of the system...And "growth" isn't a goal, unlike every for-profit corporation - In healthcare growth either means more sick people, or forcing each sick person to pay more. That kind of thing.

^^^^^^
Until you get the bill, babe.

Until you get the "actual" bill.




You're basing medical shit the same way you're calculating a car repair estimate?
How has THAT worked out for you?

Hospitals operate on referrals...They do not do much without that referral...as it is the authorization from the payer for the services...

Your insurance company knows in general what your appendix surgery is going to cost before it is scheduled...lol

Tell that ANAL B*TCH to either unblock me or stop peeking in like a chicken shit.

Kiss my ass, Anal-me!

Most insurers use RBRVS (Resource Based Relative Value System) same exact methodology used by Medicare when approving cost for procedures...

God help me I wood.

The whole developed world delivers healthcare via a public/non-profit system. (Obviously doctors and nurses get paid... Stockholders do not.)

So how do you figure it's "not an option"? You mean because the profiteers will never allow it?

I do not have data for those countries....nor would it matter...the point was the cost of service between not for profit and for profit does not vary greatly as it is mostly pre-negotiated based on RBRVS...

RBRVS is essentially price oversight...

WE are talking about insurance the two choices are for profit (what we have) or single payer (medicare for all) both will pay a for profit healthcare delivery the same exact way...one keeps billions for share holders the other does not...

why is that so hard to grasp...

Sooooooo...

My choices are welfare for the rich or gubment bureaucracy???

I am holding out hope for nonprofits because the first two choices are woefully inadequate!

RBRVS is a direct function of insurance companies???