Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
My last job insurance was up until the last year of my employment where it went to 25 a week. As a matter of fact I have never met a single person who has an employer that doesn't provide insurance. And if they are at an employer that doesn't provide insurance I would say find somewhere else to work. If I lose my job I'd use COBRA.
That's great for you and your friends. What about people who are self employed and denied insurance? I suppose they should just get jobs, is that really the way to a stronger more productive country? When I lost my last job the COBRA was $675/mo and I'm in my thirties. I couldn't pay that and my rent.
Are you saying the current system is fine because it works well for you? No one else matters?
My last job insurance was up until the last year of my employment where it went to 25 a week. As a matter of fact I have never met a single person who has an employer that doesn't provide insurance. And if they are at an employer that doesn't provide insurance I would say find somewhere else to work. If I lose my job I'd use COBRA.
Paully AGAIN..you are SO out of touch with reality.
First.. yes.. you're employer paying MOST if not ALL of your insurance is RARE! AND may have something to do with how high up in the corporate ranks you are.. for example.. do you think those rich CEO's making million dollar bonuses actually ALSO contribute to their employee insurance plan.. NOPE.. they are offered full benefits for that.. while the "average" employee has to contribute. As many of the links posted have pointed out. .those contributions by employees are going up and up as employees are cutting back due to costs. I believe someone posted information that spoke about how health insurance premiums for corporations would exceed income by a certain year.. if I'm not mistaken it was 2008! Watch how employers will now really start cutting back further and futher.
You think it's so easy as to "find another job".. yeah.. right.. okay! We'd all like to live on yoru planet where things are rosey..there isn't a recession and health insurance is affordable! Because the rest of us aren't living in that world!
As for buying Cobra..LOL.. do you think if someone LOOSES their job adn LOOSES their income they can actually AFFORD to pay COBRA. When I was in between jobs and single I kept my COBRA and it cost me about $300 plus a month!! No.. most families will not be able to afford keeping up the premium.. which could be anywhere from $800 - $1200/month for a family if they are out of work.. oh.. and those premiums are much more than quoted if they then have to try and shop for individual insurance.. I know.. I've shopped it! Nope.. they may be able to hold on for a month or two and pray that another job is found in the interim.. but if it's not.. well.. that family will then loose it's coverage..
Where did you buy your rose colored glasses? I would like to get myself a pair!
That's great for you and your friends. What about people who are self employed and denied insurance? I suppose they should just get jobs, is that really the way to a stronger more productive country? When I lost my last job the COBRA was $675/mo and I'm in my thirties. I couldn't pay that and my rent.
Are you saying the current system is fine because it works well for you? No one else matters?
Acupunk.. that's pretty much what he has said in a previous post only a few posts up..LOL.. a very selfish outlook I'd say.
If all your proposed changes went into effect we wouldn't need it. I think proponents of UHC are misunderstood as wanting other people to pay for their free health care. I can only speak for myself, but all I want is for people to have good health care that they can afford and health care shouldn't be tied to employment. A diabetic should have the freedom to start their own business AND have health care, but in most states diabetics can be denied individual coverage or forced to pay much higher premiums.I'm also willing to pay more based on my income so less fortunate people will be covered.
How could people afford it if it isn't tied to employment? Are you proposing healthcare for all unemployed, never employed, or those temporarily unemployed, or those self-employed, or what?
Which states deny individual coverage for diabetics? Did you know that in fact many states mandate coverage for diabetes and diabetes related expenses at no additional premium?
See, here's where a lot of people are NOT like you, and what you want is for people to be like you and willing to pay more for others. If a self-employed person makes less than you, do you think it's okay for this self-employed person to pay less than you do to pay for a person who chooses to work say part-time (and make less than a self-employed person), because the part-timer makes less than he does? What if the self-employed person increases his income one year and then fluctuates another, does his income-based premium fluctuate with his earnings?
How could people afford it if it isn't tied to employment? Are you proposing healthcare for all unemployed, never employed, or those temporarily unemployed, or those self-employed, or what?
I was writing specifically to the self employed, but it should not be tied to employment because people change jobs regularly in today's society.
Which states deny individual coverage for diabetics? Did you know that in fact many states mandate coverage for diabetes and diabetes related expenses at no additional premium?
Many states allow denial of individual coverage for any number of health conditions and if they do offer it it is much more expensive. I was denied insurance in CA for a minor condition my doctor said was no problem.
See, here's where a lot of people are NOT like you, and what you want is for people to be like you and willing to pay more for others. If a self-employed person makes less than you, do you think it's okay for this self-employed person to pay less than you do to pay for a person who chooses to work say part-time (and make less than a self-employed person), because the part-timer makes less than he does? What if the self-employed person increases his income one year and then fluctuates another, does his income-based premium fluctuate with his earnings?
I want insurance available to all people and I am willing to pay taxes for it. I believe a healthy country is a strong country and I am able to care about my community unlike so many who simply do not care about anyone but themselves. I realize many people are not like me.
How could people afford it if it isn't tied to employment? Are you proposing healthcare for all unemployed, never employed, or those temporarily unemployed, or those self-employed, or what?
Yes.. that is what UHC is.. btw.. the unemployed already have FREE healthcare .. it's called Medicaid. BUT with a UHC system, if you loose your job you won't also have to worry about loosing your insurance coverage or having to pay a Cobra you probably wouldn't be able to afford.. considering that you have lost your income.. And..if you get a new job you don't have to worry about .. okay. is my dr. now in THIS plan.. and is THIS covered in this plan etc. I've had many jobs in my lifetime and everytime you change jobs you also had different kinds of coverage and a lot of times you had to switch Dr's etc.
Which states deny individual coverage for diabetics? Did you know that in fact many states mandate coverage for diabetes and diabetes related expenses at no additional premium?
I can think of one that I know of MT for one.. then there is also states that base premiums on pre-existing conditions etc (and if you're unfortunate enough to have one you probably won't be able to afford the premium). NY is a state that mandates coverage no matter condition and health. While looking into which state I can relocate too I must be careful to make sure that I am moving to a state that does not allow insurers to reject you OR pay higher premiums.
See, here's where a lot of people are NOT like you, and what you want is for people to be like you and willing to pay more for others. If a self-employed person makes less than you, do you think it's okay for this self-employed person to pay less than you do to pay for a person who chooses to work say part-time (and make less than a self-employed person), because the part-timer makes less than he does? What if the self-employed person increases his income one year and then fluctuates another, does his income-based premium fluctuate with his earnings?
In theory.. this is what would happen with a UHI.. because if done properly, you will pay an income tax for it..like SS. And guess what.. this is what is happening in ANY tax you pay. We all get pretty much the same for the taxes we pay, but some contribute more because they make more.. Same with property taxes and school systems .. if you're house is worth more, you pay more taxes.. less, you pay less taxes. And so on and so on. The KEY to remember here is that it is all PROPORTIONATELY equal. Where RIGHT NOW . middle income families are having to pay upwards of 20% of their income (and that is a conservative number) toward medical premiums.. which , BTW doesn't always cover everything. Whereas someone who is upper middle or rich is paying inthe neighborhood of 1, 2 to maybe 10%. If a family takes a lower premium with higher deductables and less coverage, they REALLY could end up in trouble.. as a lot do. As employers start cutting back their contributions to employer based premiums (and they are and will continue to head that way at the rate that premiums rise) this will become more commonplace.. That's why the number of uninsured and underinsured are growing faster year over year.
The proposed UHI models do not offer insurance to anyone who already has access to insurance.
ANYONE LISTENING?
What does this mean? Anyone who is not happy w/ the cost of their premiums right now . . . TOUGH.
Again - anyone listening?
The proposed plans by the politicians are NOT a true UHI! They are CALLING it that. . but it's NOT.. the true model of a UHI exists in France, UK, Canada..
We're ways away from a true UHI.. but atleast we're talking about it.. atleast the politicians are inching towards it..but it does fall seriously short of what a true UHI should be.
The proposed UHI models do not offer insurance to anyone who already has access to insurance.
ANYONE LISTENING?
What does this mean? Anyone who is not happy w/ the cost of their premiums right now . . . TOUGH.
Again - anyone listening?
We already know that, this is a theoretical discussion. The point of fighting for UHC is to change the system. This is just a discussion, no one here as far as I know has any control over what the government decides to do.
We already know that, this is a theoretical discussion. The point of fighting for UHC is to change the system. This is just a discussion, no one here as far as I know has any control over what the government decides to do.
NO.. we don't have any control.. The corporations of America are in control... and in the case of the health insurance system.. the insurance company lobbyist have control..
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
