Covered California Rate Increase 12.5% for 2018 (purchases, prices, law)

[Ro2113]

Originally Posted by phantompilot

How is giving people "affordable access" to something that is by nature costly, NOT a handout?

Do you lefties even think about the words you use? Or is just regurgitation of whatever you heard Madcow or Pelosi or those dudes on The View spout off?

Perhaps you should read the article instead of flying off at the mouth.

Originally Posted by phantompilot

You overlooked the most obvious - that we are robbed to pay for free care to tens of millions of invaders from the Third World, who are all mooching "free" health care off our system. That's why your x-ray costs $600 instead of $60.

Scapegoating is not a viable solution. Getting rid of one group of people is not going to magically decrease healthcare costs. We need viable solutions instead Trumpisms.

[modernist1]

Originally Posted by phantompilot

How is giving people "affordable access" to something that is by nature costly, NOT a handout?

Do you lefties even think about the words you use? Or is just regurgitation of whatever you heard Madcow or Pelosi or those dudes on The View spout off?

In the developed world affordable health care is no more a handout than access to a public library, or public schools or the police, fire departments. All other major advanced capitalist countries, the UK, France, Germany, Japan etc have well-established national health services.
A ride in an ambulance shouldn't be the cost of a long haul international airfare. The US is the outlier.

[Independentthinking]

"In the developed world"...sure. The United States is in the developed world. Last I checked, we were more economically advanced and technologically advanced than just about everyone (which is the definition of the "developed world"). Just because you don't agree with the fact that we don't have socialized medicine does not mean we are not in the "developed world"

I'm curious, Is this "developed world" you speak of one that financially rapes the Middle Class with excessive taxation?

[CA4Now]

Originally Posted by modernist1

In the developed world affordable health care is no more a handout than access to a public library, or public schools or the police, fire departments. All other major advanced capitalist countries, the UK, France, Germany, Japan etc have well-established national health services.

A ride in an ambulance shouldn't be the cost of a long haul international airfare. The US is the outlier.

Thank you. You said it so much better than I could have.

[CA4Now]

Originally Posted by shooting4life

We don't all benefit from taking money from many and giving it to a few.

Where do you get the idea that we are "giving it" to a "few"? Are you speaking of people who are eligible for Medicaid?

People who needed emergency coverage still got it before Obamacare.

At huge costs to the rest of us. Those costs are obviously built into our premiums.

The problem with all the big government pro Obamacare types is that they never do anything that actually reduces costs.

Allowing people access to health care on a regular basis so that when they need medical intervention, they can receive it, reduces overall medical costs in the long run. The ear infection in the child is treated with antibiotics so he doesn't later begin to lose his hearing and require expensive medical treatment. The adult with high cholesterol is treated with lower cost interventions so he doesn't later end up hospitalized with a stroke.

If medical care was more affordable then people wouldn't need so much assistance.
Same goes with education.

People need assistance with K-12 public education? Property taxes pay for that, regardless if the property owner has children of those ages.

[shooting4life]

Originally Posted by CA4Now

Where do you get the idea that we are "giving it" to a "few"? Are you speaking of people who are eligible for Medicaid?



At huge costs to the rest of us. Those costs are obviously built into our premiums.



Allowing people access to health care on a regular basis so that when they need medical intervention, they can receive it, reduces overall medical costs in the long run. The ear infection in the child is treated with antibiotics so he doesn't later begin to lose his hearing and require expensive medical treatment. The adult with high cholesterol is treated with lower cost interventions so he doesn't later end up hospitalized with a stroke.



People need assistance with K-12 public education? Property taxes pay for that, regardless if the property owner has children of those ages.

Please tell me about how costs have gone down since obamacare was implemented?

I would also love to hear more about how people have worse outcomes when on Medicare than when they have no insurance at all.

[Ro2113]

Originally Posted by Independentthinking

"In the developed world"...sure. The United States is in the developed world. Last I checked, we were more economically advanced and technologically advanced than just about everyone (which is the definition of the "developed world"). Just because you don't agree with the fact that we don't have socialized medicine does not mean we are not in the "developed world"

I'm curious, Is this "developed world" you speak of one that financially rapes the Middle Class with excessive taxation?

Loaded language doesn't help your argument. At the end of the day across party lines people are beginning to want some type of universal healthcare. Maybe not Obamacare but some type of universal healthcare.

[Independentthinking]

Originally Posted by Ro2113

Loaded language doesn't help your argument. At the end of the day across party lines people are beginning to want some type of universal healthcare. Maybe not Obamacare but some type of universal healthcare.

There's nothing loaded at all about my language. He erroneously used a term ("developed world") and I corrected him on the meaning. And if you can find any legitimate survey that specifically spells out the cost in taxes for Universal Healthcare, you might be on to something. Unfortunately, other than cherry picked examples, people will pay more. The UK, Germany, and France (all countries with higher population counts so we can do an apples-to-apples comparison to the U.S.), do indeed financially rape their Middle Class. If I were to look at median income for most families in Metropolitan cities in CA, I suspect we would be in the mid $80k range. A cursory glance at taxation in the UK, would show that income above $46k gets taxed at 40% (a 15% increase from the U.S.)...a nice $6k jump in taxation. And it gets better. Then they have a 20% value added tax (so subtract out that CA tax you'd be paying) and you can pay roughly 12%-13% more. Sound like a financial raping to me. Anyway, looking forward to your source that covers that in a question and people still respond that they want this snake oil.

[Ro2113]

Originally Posted by Independentthinking

There's nothing loaded at all about my language. He erroneously used a term ("developed world") and I corrected him on the meaning. And if you can find any legitimate survey that specifically spells out the cost in taxes for Universal Healthcare, you might be on to something. Unfortunately, other than cherry picked examples, people will pay more. The UK, Germany, and France (all countries with higher population counts so we can do an apples-to-apples comparison to the U.S.), do indeed financially rape their Middle Class. If I were to look at median income for most families in Metropolitan cities in CA, I suspect we would be in the mid $80k range. A cursory glance at taxation in the UK, would show that income above $46k gets taxed at 40% (a 15% increase from the U.S.)...a nice $6k jump in taxation. And it gets better. Then they have a 20% value added tax (so subtract out that CA tax you'd be paying) and you can pay roughly 12%-13% more. Sound like a financial raping to me. Anyway, looking forward to your source that covers that in a question and people still respond that they want this snake oil.

Do you really not notice the term you are using to provoke an emotional reaction. Hint it starts with an 'r'.

And I don't deny that countries with single payer healthcare pay more in taxes. Here however running up the national debt may be the only option to sastisfy the increasing demand of universal healthcare. This seems to no longer be a partisan issue.

[Independentthinking]

Originally Posted by Ro2113

Do you really not notice the term you are using to provoke an emotional reaction. Hint it starts with an 'r'.

And I don't deny that countries with single payer healthcare pay more in taxes. Here however running up the national debt may be the only option to sastisfy the increasing demand of universal healthcare. This seems to no longer be a partisan issue.

Don't know anything about provoking an emotional response (feel free to point out any inaccuracies). I did notice you can't provide the proof on your claim.