Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
Editorials & Other Articles
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
2016 Postmortem
In reply to the discussion: An interesting parallel between single payer and free trade agreements. [View all]Armstead
(47,803 posts)75. And?........
I suppose there's a point there, but dang if I can find it.
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
Recommendations
0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):
87 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
An interesting parallel between single payer and free trade agreements. [View all]
DanTex
Sep 2015
OP
Paper pushing is also productive. You can't have an economy without administrative and
DanTex
Sep 2015
#12
If paper pushing was efficient we would have the best damn healthcare ever...
Human101948
Sep 2015
#16
I'm not saying that the current system is efficient, but I am saying that paper pushers
DanTex
Sep 2015
#20
So you would rather throw people out of work in the U.S. so you can have a bigger TV...
Human101948
Sep 2015
#26
Except that health care still gets administered under any system and even countries with single
Bluenorthwest
Sep 2015
#5
Regardless of the details, there is no doubt that large numbers of jobs will be lost in
DanTex
Sep 2015
#17
The real point is that those legions of people are employed to deny healthcare...
Human101948
Sep 2015
#19
It's not an objection to single payer. It's a parallel between single payer and FTAs.
DanTex
Sep 2015
#10
What are they, libertarians who would refuse to work for public health care?
Bluenorthwest
Sep 2015
#28
That's because most doctors in the UK work for the government, NHS isn't just administrators.
DanTex
Sep 2015
#32
Cost affects supply. If it costs more to produce something, then less people are willing
DanTex
Sep 2015
#60
Call it indirect if you want, but cost affects price. Other things affect price too, for example
DanTex
Sep 2015
#66
If we're counting on an infrastructure boom, then there isn't any reason to worry
DanTex
Sep 2015
#13
Which jobs are you expecting us to lose and how many can be made by stopping outsourcing
TheKentuckian
Sep 2015
#23
According to a quick google, there are about 500K health insurance workers in the US.
DanTex
Sep 2015
#27
Except health care and administration of it continues. The UK has about 64 million people and
Bluenorthwest
Sep 2015
#31
We can cry for them and nothing will change, just like the 5-6 million manufacturing jobs gone...
Human101948
Sep 2015
#36
Well, if all the same jobs were still there and paid the same amount, then there wouldn't
DanTex
Sep 2015
#46
I suggest savings would be generated from uppermanagement, marketers, and shareholders
TheKentuckian
Sep 2015
#48
"Suggest" whatever you want, but when it comes down to numbers, either there's a massive
DanTex
Sep 2015
#50
Where do you get the idea that only labor costs contributes to systemic inefficiency?
TheKentuckian
Sep 2015
#65
Administrative costs are one of the common cost benefits that SP proponents cite.
DanTex
Sep 2015
#67
the lower level employees will still be needed. It is the PROFIT that will take the hit, all those
msongs
Sep 2015
#33
Profit is a small part of the costs. Without reducing the workforce, or at least cutting their pay,
DanTex
Sep 2015
#35
What? I'm not denying that, I'm just denying that single payer is the only way to make
DanTex
Sep 2015
#56
Democrats who enjoy criticizing Obama, are seldom consistent in how they view things when
Hoyt
Sep 2015
#61
A large non government, nonprofit sector that is highly regulated with strong oversight
TheKentuckian
Sep 2015
#87