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)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 06-08-2019, 01:26 PM
 
Location: Midwest
31,359 posts, read 19,602,296 times
Reputation: 7853

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by NY_refugee87 View Post
When it was cheaper to pay the fine than to participate in ACA insurance enrichening schemes...
Can't blame them can ya?


Where was the logic in taking away the insurance plan I had...
Replacing it with something that cost 200% more
For 50% less the coverage
Modeled after car insurance with a yearly, I repeat, YEARLY deductible to be met first before insurance paid out.
PLUS insurance companies being given a license to print money by declaring.
That's out of network.

Go back to how things once were. Stop inviting the government to meddle in things it shouldn't be involved in. It only manages to arbitrarily raise costs and appeal to morons incapable of thinking, just feeling.
That is a private insurance company charging you those rates.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 06-08-2019, 01:44 PM
 
Location: Oklahoma
6,839 posts, read 6,178,314 times
Reputation: 6116
Quote:
Originally Posted by jojajn View Post
Newsflash! Private insurance companies follow the lead of Medicare for payment and reimbursement of medical expenses.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5509075/
I'll be honest. Medicare is less than ideal but it's not like for profit insurance companies are going to be willing to insure elderly people. Which is why we have Medicare to begin with.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-08-2019, 03:42 PM
 
Location: Ohio
19,875 posts, read 14,217,545 times
Reputation: 16064
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.
So a panel empaneled by Bernie Sanders to conduct a study paid for by Bernie Sanders in support of Bernie Sanders Medicare-for-All plan says something good about it.

Shocking really.

The Left-Wing Urban Institute studied Bernie's Medicare-for-All and came to this conclusion:

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.

https://www.urban.org/sites/default/...-Care-Plan.pdf
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-08-2019, 03:50 PM
 
3,554 posts, read 1,181,509 times
Reputation: 2325
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mircea View Post
So a panel empaneled by Bernie Sanders to conduct a study paid for by Bernie Sanders in support of Bernie Sanders Medicare-for-All plan says something good about it.

Shocking really.

The Left-Wing Urban Institute studied Bernie's Medicare-for-All and came to this conclusion:

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.

https://www.urban.org/sites/default/...-Care-Plan.pdf
Where is your proof to back up your bolded assertions about the study in the OP?

BTW, no one's disputing the $32 Trillion price tag. In fact, the Koch Brothers' study that also reached the conclusion of there being a $32 Trillion price tag says Medicare for All would be cheaper than the current system by at least $2 Trillion.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-08-2019, 03:53 PM
 
1,785 posts, read 452,743 times
Reputation: 1609
Of course it will be cheaper, after all it is cheaper in all other countries that have universal healthcare for all, and with better results!

But American's are all brainwashed by insurance companies into thinking otherwise.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-08-2019, 06:21 PM
 
Location: Upstate NY
35,423 posts, read 10,475,434 times
Reputation: 33443
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

What a load of guano!

Support by the uninsured for a program which picks the pockets and negatively impacts health care for those ALREADY covered will always be popular, because the uninsured "want in."

Support DWINDLES with specifics-- particularly those which increase the cost and change the care for currently very satisfied Medicare recipients.

Enough with the Big Lie.

https://www.apnews.com/4516833e7fb644c9aa8bcc11048b2169
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-08-2019, 06:25 PM
 
Location: Austin
12,181 posts, read 6,935,590 times
Reputation: 13427
Quote:
Originally Posted by citidata18 View Post
No one that's currently advocating for Medicare-for-All is saying it's free.
the presidential candidates advocating medicare for all never talk about what this will cost middle class americans, those making over $65,000, according to Bernie's own study.

Medicare for all would simply be another poorly managed, colossal system under the federal government's control like the Veterans administration health care system.

If the government controls the funding do you really believe it will have no say in how health care services are delivered? What about the abundance of Medicare regulations already in place? The government mandates those, not the healthcare providers.

Medicare on a 'small scale' is rife with problems, what can we expect if it was "for all?"

Last edited by texan2yankee; 06-08-2019 at 06:38 PM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-08-2019, 06:27 PM
 
3,554 posts, read 1,181,509 times
Reputation: 2325
Quote:
Originally Posted by texan2yankee View Post
Lie.

the presidential candidates advocating medicare for all never talk about this will cost middle class americans, those making over $65,000, or more, as family or how badly it will be managed.

Medicare for all would simply be another poorly managed, colossal system under the federal government's control.

If the government controls the funding you really believe it will have no say in how health care services are delivered? What about the abundance of Medicare regulations already in place? The government mandates those, not the healthcare providers.

Medicare on a "small scale" is rife with problems, what can we expect when it is "for all?"
You can say "lie" all you want, it doesn't make what I said factually incorrect.

I repeat, no one that's currently advocating for Medicare-for-All is saying it's free.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-08-2019, 06:34 PM
 
7,056 posts, read 1,773,412 times
Reputation: 4183
Quote:
Originally Posted by camaro69 View Post
Do most people realize that only part A is free. You still to pay for Part B and D plus a supplement for full coverage.

My retired mom on a fixed income pays over $300 a month for her "free" medicare.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-08-2019, 06:39 PM
 
Location: Upstate NY
35,423 posts, read 10,475,434 times
Reputation: 33443
Quote:
Originally Posted by jojajn View Post
Which is....a lack of affordable healthcare or health insurance. Many have found they have no choice but to resort to Medicaid of SSDI in order to provided medical care for their family.

Newsflash: That's the purpose of Medicaid.

What those currently (and happily) covered don't want, is Medicaid for All. And that is really what "Medicare for All" will be.

If the Fools On the Hill were scared poopless as constituents descended on their 2009 Town Hall meetings over the then-pending health care bill, they ain't seen nothin' yet.
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