Single payer is a death sentence for seniors

So no?

 

It doesn't. It impacts costs.
Most of your lifetime expense will take place at the end of life

 

You did not do much research. Very poor in fact. All you had to do was search on "complete lives system" to find a ton of articles from media such as Forbes, Lancet, Journal of American Physicians and Surgeons, National Center for Biotechnology Information (https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/)

The graph is from Ezekial Emmanuel's own paper in The Lancet, found here (although you need to register)
https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(09)60137-9/abstract

 

Your link shows the sd to be 16 years.

Or you can search on "average life expectancy standard deviation", here is one
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3285408/

 

Those over 65 already have MEDICARE which pays 80% of most hospital and doctor visits.It is what is being proposed as the single payer health insurance which should be upgraded to cover 100%.

 

Yes. Do you have any factual information to prove it doesn't?

https://www.mercurynews.com/2017/02...ntry-with-universal-health-care-report-finds/

 

Plus, particularly with pharmacy, you have a single buyer system. America desperately needs a single buyer to stop price gouging by Big Pharma

 

Well, my point was that any such end of life cost is not addressing the difference seen in the chart.

First of all, reducing our costs by limiting end of life care just doesn't move where we are in that chart to some other place that would be competitive with places such as Western Europe.

And, our expenditures in the last year of life aren't enough for you to point at as a cause. We spend a lot in that last year, but not enough to significantly increase our overall expenditures on healthcare, especially when considering that we're not into euthanasia, so significant care is going to be required regardless. Remember that people in Western Europe have longer life expectancies than do we.

 

That is a nice opinion - now please back it with real statistics and facts

This is interesting

https://www.healthsystemtracker.org...t-mortality-declined-u-s-comparable-countries

S0, while 32% of the data may be skewed due to the methodology utilised in America to track data, a longitudinal study shows that America has the least improvement in infant mortality rate of any developed country.

Since one of the traditional selling points for the system you have is that there is faster innovation - this has to HURT - sorry

 

You may have to wait in the public system but you do get what is needed.

TRIAGE

It under pins the entire system

 

This is where the system relies on the people to keep it honest
Forget party lines
Eschew political leanings

If the bastards are not doing what YOU want them to - VOTE THEM OUT!!!

 

And INACTION will destroy us



And for anyone's info, Medicare Trust Fund will be depleted by 2027, thus, in 2028, Congress will be looking for $1 trillion

PSST: Only a handful of countries are on track to meet the fiscal demand of their boomers.

Folks, keep buying beer with your tax cuts, the party will soon be over.

 

Easy to say. Not so easy to do. In my experience, voting doesn't fix government.

 

I don't know what you mean by "fix government".

But, healthcare is a single issue. It's not even slightly hard to identify those in congress whose "solution" for healthcare has nothing at all to do with making sure Americans get adequate healthcare.

And, we can influence them - or select someone who does listen.

 

all of them. There ain't a single senior citizen that isn't afforded necessary care. I still have three 90+ year old parents and believe me, they are well taken care of by the system.

Facts tend to blow such bullshit assertions as yours out of the water, not that they'll change your ill-informed opinion.

 

In Canada our universal healthcare covers about 75% of all expenses. Most have "gap insurance" to cover what isn't under the universal plan.

 

In major part because we count all new born fatalities except still born, when other countries don't. In many countries if the new born dies with a week or so it is not counted as infant mortality.

 

BINGO! Infant mortality in the US is horrifically high, for a First World Nation. A direct result of incredibly uninformed women, and an ego-driven and oddly 1950's-esque dependence upon Obstetricians, instead of midwives.

 

Because they are personally at the greatest distance from both. Just like they are from illegals and 'refugees'

 

Are you aware of the insanely high rates of birth intervention - many not even medically necessary - in America? The c-section rate is off its head, and the use of epidurals (and yes, an epidural IS an intervention - one with serious implications) is higher than in any other western nation.

 

You will only ever wait when you CAN wait. If you can't, you won't. All urgent (life threatening) cases are treated immediately.

And if you CAN wait, why complain about it when you're getting the work done for zip? If you're far too special to wait, you have the option of buying overpriced insurance. You can sooth your ego with a private bathroom and immediate treatment of your dodgy knee.

 

I have an elderly friend who needed a full cardiac evaluation necessitating immediate hospitalisation and a week of very expensive testing and follow-on procedures. He was also surgically fitted with a state of the art pacemaker. Upon arrival at hospital via FREE ambulance, he was fast-tracked to cardiac evaluation, assessed within minutes, then transferred to cardiac ward for tests. This is an 83 year old with a number of terminal health issues, so not a good candidate for 'money wastage', yet there it is. Public health.

 

Think again.

House GOP 2019 budget calls for deep Medicare, Medicaid spending cuts

Social Security and Medicare trustees confirm: GOP policies have hurt both programs

 

Perhaps not a good candidate if you care about efficient resource allocation, but the thing about all of this universal or single payer nonsense is that the hospitals are thinking in terms of allocation of personnel. The guy who performed this surgery earned the hospital a lot more than he would have if he was just sitting in a meeting.

How that works is that hospitals negotiate prices with the single payer (i.e. government) for particular treatments. Actual triage is left to the hospitals for the most part, so it's a case of being able to charge the government as much as they can. A guy wandering in off the street in need of a pacemaker is just like a guy with 20k in cash wandering onto a used car lot and saying he needs a car NOW! Every used car salesdude on the lot is going to be fighting over him. That teenager looking at an old beater he might be interested in if he can get the price knocked down to 2k will just have to wait.

 

Are you having difficulty discerning the word futile from necessary?