U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
 
Old 06-10-2019, 08:54 AM
 
4,323 posts, read 880,603 times
Reputation: 2400

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by DaBurgh View Post
Wait - we were told that Obamacare would fix everything that was wrong with the healthcare world
No, you were told it was a first, basic, but good, step. Quit exaggerating.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 06-10-2019, 08:55 AM
 
Location: Midwest
31,359 posts, read 19,612,643 times
Reputation: 7859
Quote:
Originally Posted by texan2yankee View Post
no. the medicare for all, single payer, is not provided in any countries that isn't failing. even the democrats admit that.
What countries are those and what democrats admit to that? Please be specific and support your statements otherwise you sound like trump, i.e. making stuff up.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-10-2019, 08:56 AM
 
Location: Midwest
31,359 posts, read 19,612,643 times
Reputation: 7859
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hoonose View Post
I agree. Obamacare was too large and complex a jump. Going to Medicare for all also too big IMO. Reforms more easily accepted when incremental, and lowering Medicare to age 50-55 would be easy to do and would provide the most bang for the buck for our broad middle class. Not only would it benefit those that would now get to enroll, it would take off a huge amount of HC risks from the private sector, helping to lower everyone else's premiums.

Most of our younger and generally healthy population are low and predictable HC risks and could then stay in the private side of HC insurance. These folks don't benefit as much from Medicare anyway. (like seniors)

Going Single payer/Medicare for all will be heavily bucked by hospitals and docs. Not nearly so much against lowering the Medicare age.


^^^^That is a good idea!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-10-2019, 08:58 AM
 
Location: Austin
12,209 posts, read 6,942,598 times
Reputation: 13447
Quote:
Originally Posted by jojajn View Post
What countries are those and what democrats admit to that? Please be specific and support your statements otherwise you sound like trump, i.e. making stuff up.
few countries have single payer healthcare insurance, which is what medicare for all would be, but in Canada, which does, for example:

https://www.forbes.com/sites/theapot.../#753e626a78d5


https://www.forbes.com/sites/timwors.../#116bec275c5a



house democrats not supporting single payer as of 2 years ago:


https://pbs.twimg.com/media/C8FkMyZWsAAxrd6.jpg
https://www.pastemagazine.com/articl...upporting.html

Last edited by texan2yankee; 06-10-2019 at 09:19 AM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-10-2019, 08:59 AM
 
4,323 posts, read 880,603 times
Reputation: 2400
Quote:
Originally Posted by DRob4JC View Post
I think if Chicago moved into Canada, the results would be slightly different.
Care to tell us the difference of life expectancy in Chicago vs the USA as a whole (Hint: I know what it is, but I want to see what research you have done, rather than just spouting a comment).

Post your results. Which I doubt you will.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-10-2019, 09:09 AM
 
Location: 15 months till retirement and I can leave the hell hole of New Yakistan
25,300 posts, read 14,034,647 times
Reputation: 6499
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hoonose View Post
I agree. Obamacare was too large and complex a jump. Going to Medicare for all also too big IMO. Reforms more easily accepted when incremental, and lowering Medicare to age 50-55 would be easy to do and would provide the most bang for the buck for our broad middle class. Not only would it benefit those that would now get to enroll, it would take off a huge amount of HC risks from the private sector, helping to lower everyone else's premiums.

Most of our younger and generally healthy population are low and predictable HC risks and could then stay in the private side of HC insurance. These folks don't benefit as much from Medicare anyway. (like seniors)

Going Single payer/Medicare for all will be heavily bucked by hospitals and docs. Not nearly so much against lowering the Medicare age.
see this I could agree with.... lower Medicare down to 55... that makes sense


many people look to retire earlier than 65...or hit a mandatory retire at 60 (military for example) and suffer in limbo between the employer sponsored HI, and medicare... so lowering it to 55 makes sense


medicare for all, is too big, and too expensive to the taxpayer
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-10-2019, 09:18 AM
 
8,881 posts, read 3,930,702 times
Reputation: 1720
Quote:
Originally Posted by jojajn View Post
^^^^That is a good idea!
As I recall that was part of Hillary's HC reform proposal.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-10-2019, 09:42 AM
 
5,423 posts, read 2,008,185 times
Reputation: 6885
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hoonose View Post
... lowering Medicare to age 50-55 would be easy to do and would provide the most bang for the buck for our broad middle class. Not only would it benefit those that would now get to enroll, it would take off a huge amount of HC risks from the private sector, helping to lower everyone else's premiums.

+1. Agree 100%. Senate Bill 470 does exactly that, allowing people 50 and over to voluntarily "opt in" to Medicare if they want to. Since Medicare has lower premiums than private insurance, many if not most people will opt in.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-10-2019, 10:02 AM
 
102 posts, read 22,846 times
Reputation: 133
Quote:
Originally Posted by citidata18 View Post
In an era where Medicare-for-All is now overwhelmingly popular amongst the general populace, a new study shows that the US would see significant savings from implementing such a system, in addition to improving the economy and well-being/mental health.

https://www.commondreams.org/news/20...us-51-trillion

lol
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-10-2019, 10:04 AM
 
8,881 posts, read 3,930,702 times
Reputation: 1720
Quote:
Originally Posted by Elliott_CA View Post
+1. Agree 100%. Senate Bill 470 does exactly that, allowing people 50 and over to voluntarily "opt in" to Medicare if they want to. Since Medicare has lower premiums than private insurance, many if not most people will opt in.
Interestingly enough, my wife is in the current position of declining on Medicare though she is eligible being on dialysis for over 6 months now. With her Obamacare policy she has reached her maximum yearly OOP, and some of her meds it seems that Medicare does not cover. And at over $20K a month for meds alone, that is very important. Next year she may be forced to enroll with Medicare, we don't yet know.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
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.


Reply

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top