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 06-22-2019, 05:58 AM
 
5,466 posts, read 6,902,265 times
Reputation: 4246

Advertisements

Run, the problem is your scenario is not realistic. A 2% tax with your small premiums would never be enough to support a govt option program. A 10 to 15% tax is more realistic. Also premiums are actuarially influenced by age and health, not volunteer hours so that also makes your scenario unrealistic.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 06-22-2019, 06:03 AM
 
1,257 posts, read 288,304 times
Reputation: 1510
Quote:
Originally Posted by RunD1987 View Post
Paid for in taxes by those who opt into the program and increasing the Medicare tax fron 1.45% to 2%.
So people who work for a living have to pay endlessly for services provided for people who don't?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-22-2019, 06:58 AM
 
8,803 posts, read 4,718,281 times
Reputation: 2030
Only those eligible for coverage would be 75 years or younger and cannot be on permanent disability status with the Federal Government. (These individuals receive 100% healthcare coverage).

Be more geared for those in the middle class so wouldn't be the entirety of the population. Because the higher income you have the greater your monthly contribution be towards the plan. Because based off your prior income it would be a flat percentage of that.

So if you are single 4%, couple 5%, 6% if a family for tier 3 (70% covered)

Tier 2 be 6%, 7%, 8% (80% covered)

Tier 1 be 8%, 9%, 10% (90% covered)

Higher the tier the lower your deductible becomes and increase in coverage.

So if you make $20,000 your monthly payment for a family in tier 1 is around $166 a month. Where someone making $200,000 is around $1,666 a month.

100% coverage for those currently active duty and coverage of immediate family members.

75% discount off Government insurance for as many years were on active duty this would apply.

25% discount for those currently in the National Guard.

20% discount for those currently working with the Government, Peace Corps, AmeriCorp

4% discount if a teacher

4% if a first responder

2% if you don't smoke

4% if you volunteer 12 or more hours a month

2% if you have a physical

2% if you have two dentist cleanings.

.5% for 1 fitness event. Max is 6 fitness events. Road race, walk event, bicycle event, and so forth.

100% healthcare for those 75 or older. (That be a 6% yearly tax replacing the 1.45% Medicare tax.)

Those who opt in to the Government health plan opt to have deducted from their return a .05% to 1% deduction based off their yearly income.

You can buy supplemental health insurance. Employers who offer health savings accounts or any form of medical insurance such as health, eye, or dental insurance are eligible for federal tax breaks.

100% healthcare coverage for those who are on unemployment and have access to 100% coverage for a year.

Couples/Families making $20,000 or less a year are eligible for 100% healthcare coverage for 4 year as long as income doesn't exceed $21,000.

Single individual making $10,000 or less a year is eligible for 100% coverage for 4 year's as long as income does not exceed $11,000.

Individuals who are homeless and currently without work can receive additional 2 year's of coverage with some stipulations. Must attend weekly job training events, be connected with 211/emergency shelter, and submit to weekly testing of illicit substances.

Last edited by RunD1987; 06-22-2019 at 08:09 AM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-22-2019, 07:17 AM
 
5,466 posts, read 6,902,265 times
Reputation: 4246
Quote:
Originally Posted by RunD1987 View Post
Don't forget your taking a flat .5% yearly from those that opt in tax returns as well.

Be more geared for those in the middle class so wouldn't be the entirety of the population. Because the higher income you have the greater your monthly contribution be towards the plan. Because based off your prior income it would be a flat percentage of that.

So if you are single 2%, couple 3%, 4% if a family for tier 3

Tier 2 be 4%, 5%, 6%

Tier 1 be 6%, 7%, 8%

Higher the tier the lower your deductible becomes and increase in coverage
IMO Still not enough because you will be draining too many people into the govt option compared to current situation. Right now every worker is paying that 2% Medicare tax but such a small percentage of population is using Medicare.
Based on my purchase of Obamacare plans I think closer to 9 percent of MAGI for premiums is more realistic as you will be losing the unsubsidized folks who have no limit on percentage of MAGI they are forced to pay and basically support the whole system
Your estimate on family income/ percentage is off by about 100k per year BTW. Right now a family of 4 making just over 100k pays $1700 A month premium for silver plan with 8k deductible.

Last edited by NSHL10; 06-22-2019 at 07:28 AM.. Reason: Added
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-22-2019, 07:23 AM
 
5,466 posts, read 6,902,265 times
Reputation: 4246
Also when you put govt options out there, you usually get the older and sicker people just like Obamacare did. That will raise the costs for that govt option.

Truly the best way to go financially speaking is a universal plan where everyone pays into 1 system with no exclusions. However I don't see that being possible right now mainly due to union folks and others who get good bennies now won't go for it. Not sure how the Democrats bring them onboard. After all, very few unions stopped giving good insurance and put their members into Obamacare Market place plans since 2014.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-22-2019, 11:22 AM
 
Location: Vancouver
12,685 posts, read 8,747,108 times
Reputation: 7299
Quote:
Originally Posted by RunD1987 View Post
Only those eligible for coverage would be 75 years or younger and cannot be on permanent disability status with the Federal Government. (These individuals receive 100% healthcare coverage).

Be more geared for those in the middle class so wouldn't be the entirety of the population. Because the higher income you have the greater your monthly contribution be towards the plan. Because based off your prior income it would be a flat percentage of that.

So if you are single 4%, couple 5%, 6% if a family for tier 3 (70% covered)

Tier 2 be 6%, 7%, 8% (80% covered)

Tier 1 be 8%, 9%, 10% (90% covered)

Higher the tier the lower your deductible becomes and increase in coverage.

So if you make $20,000 your monthly payment for a family in tier 1 is around $166 a month. Where someone making $200,000 is around $1,666 a month.

100% coverage for those currently active duty and coverage of immediate family members.

75% discount off Government insurance for as many years were on active duty this would apply.

25% discount for those currently in the National Guard.

20% discount for those currently working with the Government, Peace Corps, AmeriCorp

4% discount if a teacher

4% if a first responder

2% if you don't smoke

4% if you volunteer 12 or more hours a month

2% if you have a physical

2% if you have two dentist cleanings.

.5% for 1 fitness event. Max is 6 fitness events. Road race, walk event, bicycle event, and so forth.

100% healthcare for those 75 or older. (That be a 6% yearly tax replacing the 1.45% Medicare tax.)

Those who opt in to the Government health plan opt to have deducted from their return a .05% to 1% deduction based off their yearly income.

You can buy supplemental health insurance. Employers who offer health savings accounts or any form of medical insurance such as health, eye, or dental insurance are eligible for federal tax breaks.

100% healthcare coverage for those who are on unemployment and have access to 100% coverage for a year.

Couples/Families making $20,000 or less a year are eligible for 100% healthcare coverage for 4 year as long as income doesn't exceed $21,000.

Single individual making $10,000 or less a year is eligible for 100% coverage for 4 year's as long as income does not exceed $11,000.

Individuals who are homeless and currently without work can receive additional 2 year's of coverage with some stipulations. Must attend weekly job training events, be connected with 211/emergency shelter, and submit to weekly testing of illicit substances.
I think your intentions are good, but isn't the above a lot of bureaucracy? The amount of " paperwork " and effort to keep track of all that.

How would people prove the above? What if you're a teacher for only part of the year because you got laid off?

Dentists may not like the idea of having to report patient cleanings, and if it's up to the patient, more " paperwork"

Audits would have to be done to ensure everyone was claiming correctly.

One of the biggest advantages of UHC is less bureaucracy, and a simplified billing system. That is where a lot of the savings come from.

In Canada, each province runs their own healthcare, but under the Canada Health Act. So everyone in the province has the same coverage. The more you make, the more you pay in taxes, which then goes to healthcare.

Billing is simple, and behind the scenes. No one in government sorting through any of your above suggestions.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-22-2019, 01:26 PM
 
Location: Ohio
19,904 posts, read 14,228,365 times
Reputation: 16083
Quote:
Originally Posted by RunD1987 View Post
That is option 1

Just throws a low cost health insurance into the mix via the Government. It could cause other insurance carriers find ways to compete, lower cost, and other unique new services to entice new consumers.
That's incredibly stupid and naive.

It's shocking really that so many are so ill-informed and grossly ignorant on the matter.

It is the price of medical care that determines the price of health insurance.

If you want to lower the price of health insurance, then you need to lower the price of medical care first.

The States can fix the problem. The federal government cannot fix the problem, but it can coerce the States into fixing the problem.

Congress can withhold Medicaid funding from States, until the States have repealed its laws that allow hospitals to operate as monopolies.

Hospital monopolies are the problem.

Hospital monopolies have always been the problem.

Hospital monopolies illegally collude to illegally fix prices high above Free Market rates.

That's what monopolies do.

You want proof?

Read and weep: Wills v Foster 229 Ill. 2d 393 (2008)

I can post thousands and thousands of those. They're all the same.

The plaintiff owed $80,163 in medical bills but the hospital accepted $19,005 in full satisfaction.

Why do you think the hospital accepted in $19,000 as payment in full?

Because they made a $7,000+ profit.

The actual Free Market cost of medical care was probably $9,000 to $12,000.

Then, why did the hospital bill $80,000?

Um, which part of "monopoly" do you not understand?

That's what monopolies do. Hospitals thrown spaghetti on the wall to see what sticks.

The true Free Market cost of your medical services might be $5,000 --including profit -- but the hospital sends you a bill for $45,000. Why? Again, which part of "monopoly" do you not understand and because they hospital can, and the hospital can, because you're all dumb enough to let them.

If your insurance company pays all $45,000 then the hospital monopoly makes off like a bandit.

If your insurance company negotiates a settlement of $30,000 then the hospital monopoly still makes off like a bandit.

That's why insurance costs so much.

You can end this by getting rid of the hospital monopolies.

As soon as you do, the cost of medical care drops like a rock 30%-60%.

That results in health plan coverage dropping 30%-60% and now it's a helluva lot more affordable for everyone.

Then you need to take the next step and be like Switzerland.

The Swiss only permit one owner/operator per canton. The Swiss do that to encourage competition, which results in lower medical costs.

Instead of one group operating three medical facilities in a canton, you have three different groups and that encourages competition which reduces medical prices.

How?

Do tell us what incentives monopoly hospitals have to eliminate top-heavy administration, streamline procedures and operate as efficiently and effectively as possible?

None. In fact, hospital monopolies are rewarded by over-billing you for medical services.

Sure, you're free to run an administratively top-heavy hospital, but it will cost a lot and you'll have to compete against other hospitals that have trimmed the administrative fat and introduced policies and procedures to operate efficiently and effectively to reduce the price of medical services.

Ultimately, your hospital will fail.

The only way you could compete is to trim the fat and become efficient.

That's why Free Market competition in medical care is good.

And, if you want a system like Europe, then you need to be like Europe, and that means getting rid of hospitals and moving toward the Clinic-Polyclinic Model like Europe.

Morons are too damn stupid to understand the reason Euro-States have cheaper medical care is because they abandoned the antiquated, costly, ineffective and inefficient Hospital Model in favor of the modern, cheaper, more efficient and more effective Clinic-Polyclinic Model.

Unless and until you do exactly that, you will never see the cost-savings Euro-States have.

That's why any universal system in the US will fail, because the issue was never the cost of insurance, it was always monopoly hospitals and an inefficient healthcare delivery system.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-22-2019, 01:46 PM
 
12,842 posts, read 4,643,803 times
Reputation: 5213
Quote:
Originally Posted by NSHL10 View Post
Also when you put govt options out there, you usually get the older and sicker people just like Obamacare did. That will raise the costs for that govt option.

Truly the best way to go financially speaking is a universal plan where everyone pays into 1 system with no exclusions. However I don't see that being possible right now mainly due to union folks and others who get good bennies now won't go for it. Not sure how the Democrats bring them onboard. After all, very few unions stopped giving good insurance and put their members into Obamacare Market place plans since 2014.
Having good health care provided by the government independent of employment is always better than relying on your employer for the health of your family. Being chained to the employer is not good for worker's rights.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-22-2019, 02:48 PM
 
8,803 posts, read 4,718,281 times
Reputation: 2030
Quote:
Originally Posted by PCALMike View Post
Having good health care provided by the government independent of employment is always better than relying on your employer for the health of your family. Being chained to the employer is not good for worker's rights.
If doable someone has tier 1 insurance. Then through their work the insurance is. Supplemental that covers up to 10% of care. Then with an HSA helps pay any other additional treatment/medication expenses.

Making care have little to no out of pocket cost outside of monthly payments.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-22-2019, 05:17 PM
 
2,707 posts, read 4,496,124 times
Reputation: 1571
Quote:
Originally Posted by PCALMike View Post
But the people with VA have been asked. Polls are conducted. And a large majority are satisfied with it. Even more are satisfied with Medicare.

Are you sure you havent been duped?

My personal experience being on Tricare is enough. Iím not being duped because Iíve dealt with it for almost 16 years. The experiences myself and friends of mine have had is enough to make one want to run. My personal favorite is when I wrote a 5 page letter to a commander of a hospital just so I could be seen off post. Yes, it was that bad.
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