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.
Yes and we wish to keep our employer subsidized insurance
Sure. Let me fork over $2200/year + my employer forks over $5000/year for a plan where I need to pay another $3000 deductible before the "insurance" covers anything.
Oh, you want to only have a $1000 deductible? Up my yearly costs to $3000 in premiums!
The current system only benefits those with extreme medical conditions, someone who gets in an accident, or the elderly. For your average healthy individual, you're paying a ton to not have really any benefits.
Quote:
Originally Posted by whogo
No made up fact. Stop lying. Poll after poll shows Americans are satisfied with their own health care.
I didn't lie. Show me a study that says the majority of Americans are satisfied with their health insurance. Because my reality has proven quite the opposite, with many Americans refusing to go to the doctor due to the potential costs involved. By not going to the doctor or not seeing specialists when needed, Americans are often sicker than their counterparts who have universal healthcare systems where these things get fixed or caught earlier on.
The whole system is gamed to maximize profits of the big corporation.
How does insurance work in Hawaii and Massachusetts?
Are you trying to say that Hawaii and Massachusetts have single payer?
The issue is simple. A state can not ban people from other states moving there. And they can not raise taxes as easily as the federal government without losing revenue. There is a reason why not a single country has a single payer system in only part of their country.
No. Single payer means single payer in Canada - not one system for the rich and the other for the poor.
Baloney. Canada does not have a North Korean system where all private services are banned. If you want to pay, you can get private health care services in Canada.
Are you trying to say that Hawaii and Massachusetts have single payer?
The issue is simple. A state can not ban people from other states moving there. And they can not raise taxes as easily as the federal government without losing revenue. There is a reason why not a single country has a single payer system in only part of their country.
They can certainly put requirements on who is eligible
Originally Posted by whogo The fact is those on Medicare are much more likely to die than those with private insurance.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Weichert
Thats true but only the oldest and sickest (- those on disability) are enrolled in Medicare.
Actually, that's not completely true. I believe whogo may have confused Medicare with Medicaid.
Medicaid is worse than no insurance because you still end up at emergency rooms, however Medicaid barely covers any serious illnesses which limits what the state will cover. When you use preventative care you are basically going to the free clinic (used to be reserved for the poorest), they will only address one issue at a time, and it take anywhere from 1-2 months to get an appointment.
If you are on Medicaid, you are much better served not to get sick. Problem solved.
Medicare is as good as a paid plan if you have Part B and D. Most hospitals and service providers take it if you have the supplements.
Last edited by Originalist; 10-15-2018 at 12:05 PM..
Does anyone have a list of countries with universal healthcare that are considering a switch to a USA style healthcare?
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.