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 cost( a taxpayer) will triple if not more...because now instead of me paying 500 per month and the employer paying 1500/month... that whole 2k/month cost is on me and other taxpayers
uhc/singlepayer will kill the average working taxpayer
Exactly. That is what they fail to understand. All of the costs shift to the Fed Gov and therefore the taxpayers. It would take a 25% national VAT tax to fund it.
'Single Payer' healthcare may possibly be sustainable on an individual state level and some states already have crude forms of it but on a national level it would never be sustainable.
Yes, this the platform for negotiations. Of course there will be co-pays. That goes without saying. Like a $10-$20 fee for a doctor's visit and a few hundred dollars total maximum out-of-pocket expenses every year. Thats perfectly reasonable to prevent abuse of the system. Same with the amount of services covered, it would probably be around 80% like other single payer systems.
I dont think it should extend to the undocumented. People should pay taxes to support it and the people covered should be legal residents. Maybe I'm in the minority on this issue though.
A system where health care is a right, not a pure profit machine, would also begin to address the issue of preventative care which is not profitable today. But very efficient to lower costs.
The main problem today with our health care system is that it is a "market" and the providers will charge whatever the market can bear. The market is a captured market, where people are desperate and easy prey for price gouging. Its out of control.
Exactly. That is what they fail to understand. All of the costs shift to the Fed Gov and therefore the taxpayers. It would take a 25% national VAT tax to fund it.
So, the employers would no longer have to pay that $1500 per month, correct?
Detroit is in the U.S. and is also a very good case study of the effects of hyper-progressive politics and the failure of a liberal democracy. Those are different countries and are irrelevant in the context of this thread. Your points are moot.
That is utterly absurd. Yes, Detroit is IN the US. It is also one city, largely built on a single industry, and plagued by white flight. How on earth do you compare Detroit - or any other city, for that matter - with an entire country? That's not apples and oranges, it's apples and hamburgers. You have just lost any shred of credibility with which you might have argued your case.
Last edited by Catgirl64; 05-05-2017 at 12:48 PM..
Two different comparisons: just the Big Mac vs. a Big Mac meal. What makes the meal so much more expensive in Denmark?
You are using ridiculously dated figures. Exchange rates and price levels dont stay constant for years. In your example, the minimum wage was probably around $23 an hour or something. America is soon the most expensive country in the world with the strong dollar.
Just use the latest 2017 figures and you'll see. The Danish big mac is 17% cheaper while workers are paid far more and have much better benefits.
What you are suggesting is that a large pool of people, both healthy, young, old and sick is somehow too big to be sustainable. That makes no sense. The bigger the pool to absorb the costs of the old and sick the more sustainable.
What the U.S. does have is a system that doesn't cover everyone, is more expensive by a lot and still manages to have worse medical outcomes than wider-cheaper systems in the rest of the 1st world.
there is a difference between a large pool of patients.... and a large pool of working taxpayers
going to singlepayer actually makes the pool of payers SMALLER... making it more costly to that small pool of taxpayers
there is a difference between a large pool of patients.... and a large pool of working taxpayers
going to singlepayer actually makes the pool of payers SMALLER... making it more costly to that small pool of taxpayers
It can be funded by a 5% VAT federal sales tax and a 5% payroll Medicare tax on the employer and 1% employee tax to replace the current system of employer based insurance (which is a cruel and sick system, an extension of slavery). That's $850 billion right there. Dont tell me that we cant reduce health care costs to 15.5% of GDP in this country. The second most expensive system in the world is at 12% of GDP.
How many medical malpractice lawsuits are brought in Australia or China for fatal or life altering medical errors?
It's not limited to medical malpractice. How many lawsuits are brought in other countries against a coffee shop that serves their coffee too hot?
The result is that in these countries economy can breathe while in US it is chocked. In America every business and institution needs to cover their ass with insurance with the costs rolled over to their customers. Its one reason education costs spireled out of control. It's one reason why employers go to great lengths to not hire and prefer using contractors. Overall, it is a destructive trend for society.
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.
