So in my country, Thailand, which has Universal Healthcare, people have access to 30 baht healthcare ($1). While everyone can easily choose to use the 30 baht option, people still use their private health insurance. Here are a few reasons why:
1) Even with people using government/public hospitals, the waiting is horrendous. I had to get an MRI done to see if I had a tumor that might be the cause of my Tinnitus. Their next availability is 4 months later. Now Tinnitus itself may not be dangerous, but if I DID have a tumor, I wouldn't know about it until it has gotten bigger. This scenario applies to millions of people who want to use the government healthcare system. So the questions is, how would hospitals accommodate the huge influx of patients? And would they provide the same quality of care? Doctors are humans too not robots. Moreover, people have to queue up at the hospitals at 6 am when they open. Many people even bring mattresses or makeshift beds to sleep outside just so they can get treatment. For a comparison, Quality of Healthcare system (short waiting times) Thailand Ranked 2nd. 34% more than the United States which ranked 10th (sourced from Nationmaster.com).
2) In Thailand, the rooms for inpatients at public hospitals are shared so accommodation for patients and their relatives is a problem. You don't get private rooms unless you pay for it. My 60-year-old mother recently had a seizure and was diagnosed with TTP. We had to go to a private hospital which cost us $5000 (roughly 150,000 baht) for her to stay one day in a private room and get 4 bags of blood (luckily we were insured). The public hospital would've cost us $80 dollars per day (2400 baht). It's A LOT cheaper, true, but if we had initially chosen to go to the public hospital, she might not have gotten the immediate and careful attention she needed. So if M4A is adopted, how would they deal with hospitals being overcrowded and patients receiving the same quality care? As for the number of beds Thailand ranked 52nd with 2.2 per 1,000 people and the United States ranked 37th with 3.3 per 1,000, which is about 50% more.
3) Finally, mind you that many of these doctors that work in public hospitals have to find additional work at private hospitals because the salaries are different. Doctors working at a public hospital get 20,000 – 30,000 Baht/month (about $1000) while those working at a private hospital get 2 – 5 times that amount. Will M4A increase doctors' wages or find ways to employ more doctors to deal with the increased number of patients?
In summary, what I'm trying to get at is that there's a place for Universal Healthcare. It gives people a choice of expedited and careful treatment if they want to use their health insurance.
Now I know there is a difference between the healthcare system between the two countries, but I think there's some truth to John Delaney's argument that hospitals would close down. (https://khn.org/news/delaneys-debate-claim-that-medicare-for-all-will-shutter-hospitals-goes-overboard/) Thailand's population is 70 million while the US population is 327 million. Also as a reminder, insurance for children is higher, and it's almost impossible to get insurance for elderly people or those with preexisting conditions. But if you run on the idea that Medicare for ALL is literally FOR ALL as a BASIC HUMAN RIGHT, then it shouldn't matter if you're a cancer patient that has to undergo chemotherapy for an indefinite amount of time. What would that cost?
I'm not against UBI but Bernie embracing UBI for less than 5% of primary voters is a huge risk. Especially Yang's UBI, which is 100% terrible. Bernie is already running on massively expensive, albeit 100% necessary, non-negotiable programs, and adding UBI might run the risk of pushing the needle too far. I think at best, Bernie would be able to say, "We'll take a look at working in UBI."
Look at how the centrist Democrats are already treating Bernie (and Yang). This would easily just alienate that wing of the party further, and they will just say Bernie is too pie in the sky, which they already do anyway, but it just gets easier – "Free healthcare, free college, cancel student debt, AND free money??? LOL this will never happen, this guy is being ridiculous! Let's get serious and elect Joe Biden so we can go back to the way things were." The same logic would apply in the general, since centrist Democracts are just Republicans who don't actively hate minorities and poor people.
Either way, a coalition with Yang is just a bad idea strategically, if only because I don't think you can convince a general electorate that they aren't being sold a bill of goods. I think Bernie would be better off campaigning on his current platform. It clearly resonates more, and it's just 10000000000000% better Yang's really bad UBI plan.
Everything that Dave states here also applies to having a national health insurance plan. We don't have to chose between these necessary goods. Just get both and, honestly, Universal Health Insurance is far more important than UBI.
While $12,000.00 is good, imagine if you fall ill and then you need a surgery or a hospital stay that totals hundreds of thousands of dollars. That is not even considering the cost of healthcare that will continue to raise. If Healthcare is not seeing as a human right and private companies as allowed to profit, we will continue to see people dying because of lack of healthcare and people will continue to file for bankruptcy. You are right, corporations and the rich have stole billions of dollars of our hard earned tax money to cover both.
Again I keep asking how does Bernie Sanders Get his policies passed congress? Do you really think that his major policies will get bi-partisan support. Please respond
To get my vote back Bernie would have to take on Yangs UBI, scale back the time line for $15 minimum wage and reopen the Bureau of Technological Assessment with Yang in charge of it.
If Sanders supports UBI, he should have supported UBI. He should have supported UBI 40 years ago. Didn’t Sanders march with MLK. MLK was talking about UBI. Did Sanders pay attention?
Dont support UBI because of politics. Support UBI because it’s the right thing to do.
Bernie's idea of Medicare 4 All still wouldn't address the core issue of exorbitant health care costs. It just shifts the payment of it to the government. Which would give the government control of health care. And government control of health care is only as good as the Government controlling it. We need to actually address why the richest nation in the world is getting sick. Check out Yang2020.com for his actual proposal.
500,000 Americans go bankrupt from healthcare debt VS the population of USA?
There’s no way to argue that MORE American would benefit immediately from UBI over just free healthcare. @ me. There’s no way to argue it. Example? Me and my whole community. Ask me and anyone in my neighborhood what would provide immediate help next week, $1,000 or free healthcare? 100% everyone answers $1,000.
Free healthcare helps some immediately, but not all.
UBI is step 1. Then everything else.
Oh, btw, Yang has a healthcare plan to cover everyone too, why do Bernie supporters fail to mention this?
Listen, I loved Bernie, still do. But then I head of Andrew Yang, researches Andrew Yang and learned that there is no more progressive candidate running.
Early Yang Gang member here. I will be voting for Bernie in primaries if Yang doesn’t win any states before mine. Even if Bernie doesn’t support UBI he should definitely give Yang a job in his cabinet that deals with federal UBI testing over the next 4 years.
So in my country, Thailand, which has Universal Healthcare, people have access to 30 baht healthcare ($1). While everyone can easily choose to use the 30 baht option, people still use their private health insurance. Here are a few reasons why:
1) Even with people using government/public hospitals, the waiting is horrendous. I had to get an MRI done to see if I had a tumor that might be the cause of my Tinnitus. Their next availability is 4 months later. Now Tinnitus itself may not be dangerous, but if I DID have a tumor, I wouldn't know about it until it has gotten bigger. This scenario applies to millions of people who want to use the government healthcare system. So the questions is, how would hospitals accommodate the huge influx of patients? And would they provide the same quality of care? Doctors are humans too not robots. Moreover, people have to queue up at the hospitals at 6 am when they open. Many people even bring mattresses or makeshift beds to sleep outside just so they can get treatment. For a comparison, Quality of Healthcare system (short waiting times) Thailand Ranked 2nd. 34% more than the United States which ranked 10th (sourced from Nationmaster.com).
2) In Thailand, the rooms for inpatients at public hospitals are shared so accommodation for patients and their relatives is a problem. You don't get private rooms unless you pay for it. My 60-year-old mother recently had a seizure and was diagnosed with TTP. We had to go to a private hospital which cost us $5000 (roughly 150,000 baht) for her to stay one day in a private room and get 4 bags of blood (luckily we were insured). The public hospital would've cost us $80 dollars per day (2400 baht). It's A LOT cheaper, true, but if we had initially chosen to go to the public hospital, she might not have gotten the immediate and careful attention she needed. So if M4A is adopted, how would they deal with hospitals being overcrowded and patients receiving the same quality care? As for the number of beds Thailand ranked 52nd with 2.2 per 1,000 people and the United States ranked 37th with 3.3 per 1,000, which is about 50% more.
3) Finally, mind you that many of these doctors that work in public hospitals have to find additional work at private hospitals because the salaries are different. Doctors working at a public hospital get 20,000 – 30,000 Baht/month (about $1000) while those working at a private hospital get 2 – 5 times that amount. Will M4A increase doctors' wages or find ways to employ more doctors to deal with the increased number of patients?
In summary, what I'm trying to get at is that there's a place for Universal Healthcare. It gives people a choice of expedited and careful treatment if they want to use their health insurance.
Now I know there is a difference between the healthcare system between the two countries, but I think there's some truth to John Delaney's argument that hospitals would close down. (https://khn.org/news/delaneys-debate-claim-that-medicare-for-all-will-shutter-hospitals-goes-overboard/) Thailand's population is 70 million while the US population is 327 million. Also as a reminder, insurance for children is higher, and it's almost impossible to get insurance for elderly people or those with preexisting conditions. But if you run on the idea that Medicare for ALL is literally FOR ALL as a BASIC HUMAN RIGHT, then it shouldn't matter if you're a cancer patient that has to undergo chemotherapy for an indefinite amount of time. What would that cost?
I'm not against UBI but Bernie embracing UBI for less than 5% of primary voters is a huge risk. Especially Yang's UBI, which is 100% terrible. Bernie is already running on massively expensive, albeit 100% necessary, non-negotiable programs, and adding UBI might run the risk of pushing the needle too far. I think at best, Bernie would be able to say, "We'll take a look at working in UBI."
Look at how the centrist Democrats are already treating Bernie (and Yang). This would easily just alienate that wing of the party further, and they will just say Bernie is too pie in the sky, which they already do anyway, but it just gets easier – "Free healthcare, free college, cancel student debt, AND free money??? LOL this will never happen, this guy is being ridiculous! Let's get serious and elect Joe Biden so we can go back to the way things were." The same logic would apply in the general, since centrist Democracts are just Republicans who don't actively hate minorities and poor people.
Either way, a coalition with Yang is just a bad idea strategically, if only because I don't think you can convince a general electorate that they aren't being sold a bill of goods. I think Bernie would be better off campaigning on his current platform. It clearly resonates more, and it's just 10000000000000% better Yang's really bad UBI plan.
Everything that Dave states here also applies to having a national health insurance plan. We don't have to chose between these necessary goods. Just get both and, honestly, Universal Health Insurance is far more important than UBI.
While $12,000.00 is good, imagine if you fall ill and then you need a surgery or a hospital stay that totals hundreds of thousands of dollars. That is not even considering the cost of healthcare that will continue to raise. If Healthcare is not seeing as a human right and private companies as allowed to profit, we will continue to see people dying because of lack of healthcare and people will continue to file for bankruptcy. You are right, corporations and the rich have stole billions of dollars of our hard earned tax money to cover both.
The M4All vs UBI is a false choice. Why not have both?
Again I keep asking how does Bernie Sanders Get his policies passed congress? Do you really think that his major policies will get bi-partisan support. Please respond
Really disappointed in chappelle…..
Yang or Bust
That wasn't a wink and a nod you fucking pos lmao
20 million poverty people out weigh .5 million insurance lacking people
To get my vote back Bernie would have to take on Yangs UBI, scale back the time line for $15 minimum wage and reopen the Bureau of Technological Assessment with Yang in charge of it.
If Sanders supports UBI, he should have supported UBI. He should have supported UBI 40 years ago. Didn’t Sanders march with MLK. MLK was talking about UBI. Did Sanders pay attention?
Dont support UBI because of politics. Support UBI because it’s the right thing to do.
$12k a year could buy health insurance…
Someone should run a campaign based on "Three Universals: Universal Healthcare, Universal Education, and Universal Basic Income".
YANG shouldn't drop out…yet, we are still in this fight! hope we do well today.
Hey Kyle, don’t be a sell out like New York Times that you bash every day and support Andrew Yang
I agree with you. If Bernie supports UBI, shows over.
Bernie's idea of Medicare 4 All still wouldn't address the core issue of exorbitant health care costs. It just shifts the payment of it to the government. Which would give the government control of health care. And government control of health care is only as good as the Government controlling it. We need to actually address why the richest nation in the world is getting sick. Check out Yang2020.com for his actual proposal.
Yang Gang.
Why?
500,000 Americans go bankrupt from healthcare debt VS the population of USA?
There’s no way to argue that MORE American would benefit immediately from UBI over just free healthcare. @ me. There’s no way to argue it. Example? Me and my whole community. Ask me and anyone in my neighborhood what would provide immediate help next week, $1,000 or free healthcare? 100% everyone answers $1,000.
Free healthcare helps some immediately, but not all.
UBI is step 1. Then everything else.
Oh, btw, Yang has a healthcare plan to cover everyone too, why do Bernie supporters fail to mention this?
Listen, I loved Bernie, still do. But then I head of Andrew Yang, researches Andrew Yang and learned that there is no more progressive candidate running.
He is what we need. Yang 2020
Early Yang Gang member here. I will be voting for Bernie in primaries if Yang doesn’t win any states before mine. Even if Bernie doesn’t support UBI he should definitely give Yang a job in his cabinet that deals with federal UBI testing over the next 4 years.
Get Yang and Tulsi to endorse Burnie. would be delicious