The US Will Have Single Payer and The Complete Lives System Within 10 Years

“I think Obamacare wins the day because it changed expectations,” the pundit said. “Look at the terms of the debate. Republicans are not arguing the free market anymore. They have sort of accepted the fact that the electorate sees health care as not just any commodity. It’s not like purchasing a steak or a car. It is something people now have a sense that government ought to guarantee.”



320 Million people including millions of illegals. The Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget projected a $2.8 trillion a year for single payer. According to the Congressional Budget Office, the federal government took in a bit under $3.3 trillion in revenue in 2016. Meaning the government would have to nearly double it's current tax revenue to pay for a single payer system for just the first 10 years.



Top-tier Democrats are already readying their base to accept Single Payer as the only option for America and the Republicans do not disagree. With single payer comes the Complete Lives System, while fighters of Single Payer claim to be compassionate and caring, the Complete Lives System is anything but.


The Complete Lives System, co-authored by Ezekiel J. Emanuel, M.D., Ph.D., is based on five underlying principles: Youngest First, Prognosis, Save the Most Lives, Lottery, and Instrumental Value. The aim of the system is to achieve equal outcomes so as to achieve “complete lives.” The system basically seeks to redistribute “life years” from older individuals to younger individuals.

The proposed mechanism to achieve this is a centralized system of rationing medical care that limits care for older individuals in favor of providing it to younger individuals. The authors of the Complete Lives article claim this is not age discrimination because all individuals are subject to aging and older individuals have already lived through the age of younger individuals and thus have a greater number of life years.

The Youngest First principle is actually a misnomer, as not all younger individuals are deemed worthy of receiving needed medical care. Children and infants, for example, are deemed to be less worthy of receiving medical care than adolescents and young adults because society has invested more in adolescents and young adults than it has in children and infants. The authors argue that those societal investments will be wasted unless the adolescent or young adult is allowed to live a complete life.

The worth of an individual is determined from the standpoint of the individual’s worth to society. Placing the needs of society above the needs of the individual is a core tenet of socialism and communism.

The Complete Lives System clearly discriminates against individuals based on young age, and the contorted argument that those who have obtained more life years should have medical care redistributed to those who have lived fewer life years is not offered to rebut a claim of age discrimination against the very young.

The Complete Lives System gives great weight to age as an objective measure to be used in rationing care. The authors generated an age-based graph to prioritize who gets care. The graph favors those in the 15-40 age group and disfavors the elderly and the very young. The probability of receiving a medical intervention falls precipitously past age 55.

The Complete Lives System also attempts to adjust for the investment to which people of a certain age are “morally entitled,” so as not to discriminate against victims of the “social injustice” of unequal wealth. In addition, the Complete Lives System advocates rationing care based on prognosis, or potential for living a complete life—a subjective, sometimes inaccurate judgment.


Full text here: http://blog.jonolan.net/wp-content/...blicanism_and_Deliberative_Democracy_Meet.pdf



Consideration of the importance of complete lives also supports modifying the youngest-first principle by prioritizing adolescents and young adults over infants. Adolescents have received substantial education and parental care, investments that will be wasted without a complete life. Infants, by contrast, have not yet received these investments. Similarly, adolescence brings with it a developed personality capable of forming and valuing long-term plans whose fulfillment requires a complete life.


http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-london-40740693




This is our future.





Obama care gave millions of people health care who never cared one thought about their health or payed one dime towards health care.

It was a transfer of wealth and everyone who paid for health care would now have to pay more in order to fill the new gap.

And that is what liberals want in every sector.
 
You ever notice the ones calling others Fascists are the ones who support top down government control?

As government grows its say in our day to day life grows too. The IRS HAS to GROW. I just heard Bernie on the radio " Healthcuare is not a privilege! its a right!"
How righteous do you have to be to steal other peoples stuff to give away and die before the bill is due? A smart preschooler could come up with that all by themselves.
 
I apologize. My jimmie is rustled. Ill add this and be out.
if you are not a) very old, b) very young or c) infirm -the government should not be paying for your healthcare.

edit- not done. If we are going to single payer, I wanna see the death penalty for smoking a joint. Premarital sex should be outlawed because it increases the risk for STDS. Im serious . I'm not paying for someone elses high risk behavior and I would thru single payer. Either small government\make your own way or nanny state \ toe the line \all high risk behavior is outlawed to minimize the tax payer burden. We shouldn't have it both ways.
 
Last edited:
Democrats beginning their push for complete government overhaul of healthcare...You will have single payer in less than 10 years

Hows that going to happen exactly? You think republicans will pass it?
 
I apologize. My jimmie is rustled. Ill add this and be out.
if you are not a) very old, b) very young or c) infirm -the government should not be paying for your healthcare.

edit- not done. If we are going this to single payer, I wanna see the death penalty for smoking a joint.Premarital sex should be outlawed because it increases the risk for STDS. Im serious . I'm not paying for someone elses high risk behavior and I would thru single payer.

The government wouldn't be paying anything. We would be through taxes. If you think you're not already paying for people's high risk behavior then you either don't know how insurance works or you don't have insurance.
 
This is unfortunate but we sorta see it coming. Once you give people free stuff, you can't take it back without creating a storm.
Like free fire departments, police departments, public education, and national defense?
 
Hows that going to happen exactly? You think republicans will pass it?


Republicans will do what they are doing now...nothing. Keep Obamacare intact and let the Democrat regain power and it's Single Payer City
 
Republicans will do what they are doing now...nothing. Keep Obamacare intact and let the Democrat regain power and it's Single Payer City

So you think dems will win enough seats in 2018 to flip control? It's a pretty big long shot.
 
The government wouldn't be paying anything. We would be through taxes. If you think you're not already paying for people's high risk behavior then you either don't know how insurance works or you don't have insurance.

Im well aware the government doesn't have anything it taxes for its income.

" If you think you're not already paying for people's high risk behavior.."

I know. I want it stopped.
 
Last edited:
Like free fire departments, police departments, public education, and national defense?
And you know who uses teh police department? Poor people and criminals, that's who! They gettin that free ride.
 
Im well aware the government doesn't have anything it taxes for its income.

" If you think you're not already paying for people's high risk behavior.."

I know. Im want it stopped.

There is no time in the history of health insurance that people weren't paying for other people's unhealthy behavior. That just isn't reality.
 
Except none of it is free
giphy.gif
 
There is no time in the history of health insurance that people weren't paying for other people's unhealthy behavior. That just isn't reality.

But I'm actually working. To get a plan. IM working...and paying for it! Plus, I live a lifestyle that promotes as few hospitial trips as possible. Plus #2... before Obamacare..I could opt out of it. Now I can't. I would enjoy a brief summary of "the history of health insurance" too.
 
A healthy population isn't in the interest of the public good?

The freedom from taxes with a healthy morals is also in the interest of the public good. Those other things (minus education) help you to not GET KILLED. You know, like being shot, being invaded by China you know MAJOR threats to the very nation.
 
Last edited:
The freedom from taxes with a healthy morals is also in the interest of the public good. Those other things (minus education) help you to not GET KILLED. You know, like being shot, being invaded by China you know MAJOR LIFE threatening issues.
So like cancer and infections?
 
Back
Top