Comments by "SmallSpoonBrigade" (@SmallSpoonBrigade) on "" video.

That's a detail that a lot of people forget. This is also a significant drag on the economy as people that want to start small businesses have to consider their access to health care during the early stages of the start up process. My suspicion is that the main reason that corporations hate medicare for all is that it would make it easier for people to start businesses and to change jobs.
55
Not likely, hospitals are legally required to provide emergency care regardless of whether or not they think they'll be paid for it. And if they truly can't pay, the hospital either waives part of it or the patient declares bankruptcy and has the bills eliminated. Which is part of why our health care is so expensive, there's a lot of charity care on top of a lot of care provided to treat things that would have been prevented had the patient received preventative care via regular checkups.
7
I'm currently on medicaid, and it's OK, but it took ages to get my last medication refill because of the rules related to what manufacturers are covered. With Bernie's plan, that likely wouldn't be an issue as every manufacturer would need to have a contract in order to sell anything prescription in the US.
4
That's one of the more minor issues, but for individuals that don't have a lot of money or access to a car, that can mean not getting treated at all as that probably meant taking a day off work. AFAIK, there still isn't a legal right to paid sick days.
3
The problem is that without networks, the insurance companies would have no idea how much to charge for premiums to cover the possible future costs. I'm not at all a fan of insurance companies, but by the same token without networks, all doctors would have to be required to provide service at some sort of standard rate or you'd have insurers being forced to pay whatever rate the doctors wanted to charge. With medicare for all, you'd likely see something more akin to the latter, but the prices would more accurately reflect the actual cost of service as doctors wouldn't be forced to highball every possible thing they're billing for to ensure they're getting the money they need when most of it is denied by the insurance company.
2
I had a heat stroke and water intoxication years ago and I was fortunate enough to go to a hospital where the bill was less than that. It was like $2k for the ambulance and the hospital stay, including time in the ICU came out to about $17k, IIRC. I was fortunate enough to have decent insurance, thanks to COBRA, but without that, I would have been looking at roughly $20k for 3 days in the hospital. I was just fortunate enough that I had my insurance card and could ask for help. Which I was barely able to do as I had completely lost my ability to find words to speak.
2
@ilfaus What's your point? For many people in the US, you can't get that kind of service, even if you've got the money and you definitely won't know how much it's going to be until after the fact.
2
Dermatology waits are the norm because there aren't enough doctors to meet the demands. That's not something that's likely to change much, in either direction, with medicare for all. What would change that is if we provided more financial support to encourage doctors to go into that specialty to help better match projected need.
1
My room mate had a bad experience with the NHS when his father was dying. But, even with that experience, he was very clear that he supported the NHS and wouldn't give it up in order to get what we have in the US. And that was really telling, even with a significantly bad experience, he still overwhelmingly supported the system.
1