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.
Nothing wrong with my heart or anything else. Why do you ASSume everybody has to go to the hospital. Plus I get a discount for paying cash because he doesn’t have to hire anyone to process insurance claims. He does not take Medicare patients. He takes only cash and anyone on Medicare can file their own paperwork. He owns his own practice and does not even have a RN. Does his own Bp and weight checks and so on. I like this guy.
Most people eventually go to the hospital for something. And doctor visits are not the big ticket item insurance is needed for,
Democrats had full control of all three branches for two years.
They could have passed anything they wanted.
But they chose to ram useless Obamacare down the country's throat instead.
Stop drinking the Koolaid, that's the opposite of what happened with the ACA, you are thinking of the Republican ACHA.
It's true the the Democrats COULD have just rammed something down everyone's throat, but they didn't. They spent months debating and including dozens of GOP amendments. The fact that the GOP then refused to vote for ACA anyway is on them, not the Democrats. They were given a seat at the table, unlike the Democrats who were not even allowed to read the Republican bill,
And yes, millions of people hated having access to health insurance rammed down their throats. The only useless thing are the people who think that denying that access is a decent way to treat their fellow citizens.
Without the mandate, the insurance companies will be hit with customers waiting until they need high cost care before signing up.
If they have to accept those with pre-existing conditions, then in order to stay financially solvent, they have to charge everyone sky high premiums.
Which, of course, means that even more will wait until they desperately need coverage.
Yep. But they won't be able to buy it at any price after Jan 2019. They will still be sick and they will still go to the ER. The burden though will be shifted from them and insurers to the remaining insured and the providers meaning rates and fees will be going up, up and up some more in a badly broken system. The GOP is setting the table for an unstoppable outcry for national health insurance. Keep in mind that Obamacare was the conservative and insurer designed alternative to that. The GOP sabotaged its own alternative to get at Obama and sooner or later they are going to get some version of a heavy government plan.
But it's good you're worried about insurance company profits tho.
I am not worried about insurance company profits. I am correctly explaining that any private company differs from government in that private companies cannot simply print revenue into existence, so they must generate revenue from sales, and in order to continue existing, revenue must exceed cost, which we call profit. No business except government can survive without profit. That's a simple economic fact.
Making that claim about me caring about insurance company profits is an appeal to ridicule fallacy in lieu of an actual rebuttal with any substance. Duly noted.
Back on topic...
The individual mandate forces people to purchase a private good and is anathema to any and every concept of freedom. It was also poorly designed because the government didn't want to appear as tyrannical as they were being, so they kept it too low for it to properly scare/coerce the intended audience of the young and healthy. It should have been double what premiums would cost, then it might have properly frightened/coerced people into buying a product that preexisting/community pricing rules told them they didn't actually need. But that would have shone too bright a light upon the tyranny of it all, so the government pussed out, made the individual mandate way too easy to avoid, and then made lofty speeches about how we owed each other this contribution of buying what Obama told us to buy.
Ironically, it was those same millennials and Gen Y'er youngsters that gave him majority votes who blew him off the most. Adverse selection. You can play your appeal to ridicule game with me for pointing it out, but that won't change the truth of what I am saying. The tyranny of ObamaCare was bad government to begin with, and how cowardly and fecklessly they wrote it to make it even remotely politically viable just made it even worse. A plan so stupid, it could only come from government.
A 25% VAT that EVERYONE pays will cover that.
Here's how we get to that percentage...
Looking at the costs to the Fed Gov for Bernie Sanders' Medicare for All single-payer national health care, a liberal think tank, Urban Institute, has projected that it will cost the Fed Gov an additional $3.2 trillion per year ($32 trillion over 10 years) as costs are shifted away from employers, individuals, cities, and states, and onto the Fed Gov.
Quote:
"The increase in federal expenditures would be considerably larger than the increase in national health expenditures because substantial spending borne by states, employers, and households under current law would shift to the federal government under the Sanders [Medicare for All] plan. Federal expenditures in 2017 would increase by $1.9 trillion for acute care for the nonelderly, by $465.9 billion for those otherwise enrolled in Medicare, and by $212.1 billion for long-term services and supports.
In total, federal spending would increase by about $2.5 trillion (257.6 percent) in 2017. Federal expenditures would increase by about $32.0 trillion (232.7 percent) between 2017 and 2026. The increase in federal spending is so large because the federal government would absorb a substantial amount of current spending by state and local governments, employers, and households."
At the current annual US consumer spending level of $11.7 trillion, a 25% national VAT tax will raise $2.93 trillion in tax revenue. Almost enough, currently, to pay for single payer national health care Medicare for All. Adjust the VAT tax rate up or down as needed according to actual health care costs.
So... Are those who want single-payer Medicare for All on board with that? For paying a 25% VAT tax on everything, we can have it. Let's put it to a national referendum. Have the US voters vote on it in a federal election.
Ready to pay that 25% VAT? European countries have that.
Nothing wrong with my heart or anything else. Why do you ASSume everybody has to go to the hospital. Plus I get a discount for paying cash because he doesn’t have to hire anyone to process insurance claims. He does not take Medicare patients. He takes only cash and anyone on Medicare can file their own paperwork. He owns his own practice and does not even have a RN. Does his own Bp and weight checks and so on. I like this guy.
Congratulations. You have solved the incredibly hard problem if delivering healthcare to the rich and healthy.
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.
The only useless thing are the people who think that denying that access is a decent way to treat their fellow citizens.
