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.
I would say open up Medicare for under 65s, but for some reason the, "lesser informed" among us say it's communism if young people have Medicare but freedom if seniors get it. Should be spelled freedumb
Great but that is government run and doesn't meet the OP's goals. (which are really not even known)
and do not tell me "because other countries do it".
There is gov't run HC like the VA. Owned and operated. Including the facilities with gov't employee docs.
There is gov't run HC like Medicare/Medicaid, where the delivery is primarily in the private sector.
And then there is a public option. Which could include any of the above, but retains some private choices for patients and docs.
And of course there is single payer.
and do not tell me "because other countries do it".
B/c you hate the current for-profit model that we have that delivers the thing you want. I've never seen more people complain about keeping gov't out of an industry then get mad that the industry gets rich off them. What did you expect?
"OMG... why are my premiums so high?!" B/c you wanted insurance companies to be profitable, genius.
Because other people will pay for it... that's the left's mantra... OTHER people pay for me...
May as well be the current mantra, given that especially pre-ACA, people who couldn't afford healthcare had to wait until their health problems got bad enough to go to the ER - and guess who pays for that?
I would say open up Medicare for under 65s, but for some reason the, "lesser informed" among us say it's communism if young people have Medicare but freedom if seniors get it. Should be spelled freedumb
So, the people who paid into the system all their lives think Medicare is free? Obviously, if they opened it up to everyone, the people under 65 would have to start paying more in their early years than they are now or it would quickly go bankrupt. After a certain age, such as 65, you could continue to pay into it with non Social Security income. Maybe even exempt income from RMDs from IRAs and 401Ks. Anything over RMD levels could still be taxed.
It could probably be done, but you would have to avoid gouging people who have paid into it all this time without coverage until they reached retirement, only to give it to everyone. Kind of reminds me about years ago when I had to pay for an internet browser on a yearly basis, only to have them give it to everyone later on. Do any of the millennials ever thank us for footing that bill?
Can people on the left please explain why government run health care is the ONLY solution for the USA?
Because the one thing that people in the USA have in common is that they are governed by the USA.
That translates to a single government plan being better than a messed up patchwork of different plans that depend upon where you live, were you work, how old you are, and so on. The USA is our country and with a plan that's the same no matter where you go in the USA, you are free to move for a better job, move to be near your family, move for a better climate. A lot of it is about the freedom to live in whatever part of our country you want to, not to be tied to one job or one area because your health insurance would suck if you ever left.
People with that kind of freedom to live where they want to and not worry about losing their health insurance, will usually be happier people.
You realize, that to many here, that makes you at a minimum, a socialist? (I dont think that of you FWIW. I miss the old days "Main Street Business Owner Republican)
Thank you for your kind words! I've been advocating the party going back to the "Eisenhower era" in regards to the view and role of government but it's the party of the far-right loonies these days sad to say. They don't want any government role in anything except bombing Muslims, building absurdly expensive (and unnecessary) walls, and giving tax cuts to billionaires.
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.
I've been advocating the party going back to the "Eisenhower era" in regards to the view and role of government but it's the party of the far-right loonies these days sad to say. They don't want any government role in anything except bombing Muslims, building absurdly expensive (and unnecessary) walls, and giving tax cuts to billionaires.
