Medicare for All - from the viewpoint of small and medium sized businesses...

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: Metallicus

It isn’t practical and it will cause people like me to pay for other people’s healthcare which should be their responsibility not mine.

You're doing that right now, if you're paying employment or self-employment taxes.

But do you think people that can't pay medical costs should just die? Or do you think everyone should be paid enough to pay their medical costs?

Just because I am paying unfair taxes now doesn’t mean I want to increase my tax burden. I don’t want to make it worse with a ridiculous Medicare for all plan.

a reply to: Metallicus

I think the idea of universal coverage is good, very good. It seems to work in other places.

I agree that the implementation is problematic in the US, due mostly to the structure of the health care system. It has a lot of inertia behind it.

I think an "opt in" plan might serve as a good transition. Pay a premium in order to be included prior to Medicare qualification.

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: Metallicus

It isn’t practical and it will cause people like me to pay for other people’s healthcare which should be their responsibility not mine.

You're doing that right now, if you're paying employment or self-employment taxes.

But do you think people that can't pay medical costs should just die? Or do you think everyone should be paid enough to pay their medical costs?

True.

I actually agree with the single payer health care system.

a reply to: Edumakated

1) Not really.... google it.
2) You get a bill AFTER services performed.
3) Yes. Because they get a tax break for doing so. Any tax break should go to employee. The insurance should be portable. Imagine what kind of fustercluck it would be if you had to change your car insurance everytime you changed jobs? Your health insurance should have nothing to do with your employer.

1) So Google and personal opinion are your guides ? The States made the decision whether to opt in or out.
2) When would you expect one ? I don't think anyone in the medical field can predict the future.
3) Tax break or not , they still pay their percentage . And I like it. Don't you ? For about $400/month out of my pocket , I am covered by a very good "Cadillac" plan .

Back to ya.

originally posted by: HalWesten
It has backing from Democrats only and no Fortune 500 companies. No thanks, they need to go back to private insurers and figure out how to lower the costs there instead. I don't want to give up my quality health care which will happen if we are all on the same government plan.

Link

Kaiser - you are kidding me aren't you?

Pfiffle.

originally posted by: OccamsRazor04
a reply to: FyreByrd

I am actually for a single payer system. The problem is Democrats can not be trusted to create it. They will bloat it and destroy it. We need to fix immigration, remove birthright citizenship for illegals, and prevent illegals from access. We also need to allow private insurance to continue for those who want it. It needs to be well thought out and well crafted.

That can't happen today.

Nothing in this film was partisan. The intent was to just fix our system.

Why is everything so fing partisan with you all. One minute you say both parties are corrupt, all politicians are corrupt, then you talk about the saintly republican politicians.

a reply to: FyreByrd

It is partisan because every democrat proposal will raise my taxes. Republicans waste money as well, but not as much and spend it on things I care about.

a reply to: Metallicus

And you don't care about the health of those in your community?

a reply to: Metallicus

When youre in a private health fund...arent you helping pay other members claims even when youre not claiming?

a reply to: FyreByrd

Thanks for the post. Especially the video. I just want to kill myself now.

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: OccamsRazor04

Good question. Sort of.
My answer would be yes. Because I think health care should be considered a basic human right. Especially in the best country on the planet. Anything less should be considered cruelty.

Every sick or injured human who enters a U.S. Emergency room, receives basic medical care.

Universal EMTALA for all: www.cms.gov...

If they have health insurance or $$$, they get more than "basic" care.

Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Jimmy Carter have the DIAMOND package.

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: OccamsRazor04

You've changed the topic from health care to capital punishment. Congratulations.

Do you think executions should be tortuous?

Nope, general anesthesia to put them under and then off with their head.

One thing I haven't seen mentioned here is that Medicare is NOT free healthcare.

If one hasn't earned enough working points (ie worked long enough) one pays over $400 per person, no family plan. That means a young family with 2 children will pay $1600+ per month, mandatory, for Medicare.

Once one has earned enough point one pays over $130 per month, per person, no family plan. By then the kids are out of the "sick zone" where just having them share a bite with you means you get a cold or the flu.

Also, one must remember that the Medicare for ALL plan will OUTLAW all private insurance. Every Democrat for 2020 has made that clear.

Just a bit of logic: If Medicare is so great and wonderful, why are there so many options to purchase Medicare supplement plans. If Medicare paid well, no one would want one, there would be no market for supplemental plans.

Medicare pays very poorly.

So poorly that it doesn't even cover the basic expenses for the MD of going to see them or the basic expenses for the hospital. I have seen what Medicare pays the MD and hospitals on our Medicare payout forms, it is horrifically awful and often 1/2 or less then the actual cost to the MD or hospital, and frequently less than 1/4 of what the MD or hospital bill is. It is the worst paying plan out there today. What it will do to our healthcare system is totally destroy it without supplemental insurance allowed.

I agree with many others on several points:

1. Universal healthcare means equally poor care for everyone, not just because single payer healthcare doesn't pay MD or Hospitals enough to cover costs. In Europe they have started giving great pallative (comfort) care to the elderly and the very young, but denying curative care because they are weighing the cost/benefit to society for society paying for curative care. Remember, EVERYONE GETS OLD, someday under Medicare for all you may not be deemed worth it to society to cure your illness just to give you 10-15 more years of life, even if those would be good years. My boomer best friend had her breast cancer treatment over the "productive" age, and she is now healthy and cured and takes care of grandchildren while her daughter works, and has a dog sitting business on the side. Under the European style Universal Health care, which is what the Democrats point to as their model, she would be dead.

2. Interstate insurance competition will lower costs significantly and lack of it, is perhaps the biggest roadblock to affordable insurance. Think, if insurance companies are blocking this - think how much they will fight Medicare for all with no supplemental allowed.

3. Open pricing. Posting a price list should be mandatory. A menu of prices in hospitals (where a toothbrush can cost $1000), so people will know to get someone to bring those things from home. Along with estimated co-pays for the major insurance carriers in the area, letting people know what they will have to pay out of pocket. But we can't even get restaurants to post their menus outside like they must in many countries so people will know the prices before they go in, this would be a huge uphill battle. This battle however, would be far more winnable than the others.

4. My husband and I are on Medicare, it sucks. Without our supplemental insurance, well we would be in deep financial doo doo.

originally posted by: Gothmog
a reply to: Edumakated

1) Not really.... google it.
2) You get a bill AFTER services performed.
3) Yes. Because they get a tax break for doing so. Any tax break should go to employee. The insurance should be portable. Imagine what kind of fustercluck it would be if you had to change your car insurance everytime you changed jobs? Your health insurance should have nothing to do with your employer.

1) So Google and personal opinion are your guides ? The States made the decision whether to opt in or out.
2) When would you expect one ? I don't think anyone in the medical field can predict the future.
3) Tax break or not , they still pay their percentage . And I like it. Don't you ? For about $400/month out of my pocket , I am covered by a very good "Cadillac" plan .

Back to ya.

1) No, if you took five minutes on Google you'd see a variety of sources showing how Obamacare does not in fact allow cross state competition because they way the wrote the law, it isn't practical because they added additional barriers to competition.

2) I'd expect to know typical costs ahead of time for non-emergency care. I've paid cash for several fairly expensive procedures and you'd think I asked the Doctors a trick question. Price transparency is key to knowing bringinig competition and lower prices. No other service tells you what it cost after the fact.

3) That is well and good until you need to change employers. There is no logical reason that your health insurance is tied to your employer. If an employer wants to subsidize it, then they could just easily pay you more money and you can find the best policy for your family. Any amount of subsidized health insurance from the employer is just a lower salary for you.

Why can't the citizens of America have the same kind of health insurance our congressmen and representatives have; best health care the country has to offer and paid for by the US taxpayers.

Is it because they are upper class and the working class is just a bunch of peons?