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.
This actually is a conversational topic in the office. Ultimately the government doesn't have any of the infrastructure to adjudicate medical claims at a mass scale sitting in it's back pocket. The consensus here is that if medicare for all passed the government would likely have to contract with companies that have the infrastructure to 'run' their plans. Whether that means that we would become government employees? Who knows really.
I do think that not all insurance companies are large enough to get that type of contract, so would all make it? No, of course there would be job losses. However I can tell you with absolute certainty job losses are coming no matter what. Essentially all of our $1B tax break we got from Trump has gone to investing in technologies meant to replace the bulk of our workforce.
Would I personally expect a smooth transition? Probably not. Change is never easy, especially structural changes. I think it would be worth it in the long run though.
As a side note I think the thing people get wrong in the united states is they think that hospitals, clinics etc would be run by the government....that isn't it at all. The piece being replaced is your insurance, not your providers.
Thanks for taking the time to respond! It's always nice to get the perspective from someone "in the trenches."
I can't say I take issue with anything you say. I know the government already contracts much of its Medicare processing out to big insurers like BCBS.
My suspicion is the biggest heartache, besides the McCarthyism smears about death panels or the FED taking over hospitals/doctors, will be retraining people to either find new jobs or support the government's healthcare system.
Originally Posted by Eeyore1954 View Post
Since you have an employer provided plan I "assume" you are not poor. Might be a bad assumption.
Why do you want others with more money than you to have to pay for your deductibles and copays in the form of higher taxes?
Do you feel you should not be responsible for your own expenses?
Quote:
Originally Posted by citidata18
Let's frame this another way:
You're already paying for folks who are underinsured or have no insurance whenever they go to the doctor or hospital and get treatment (by law, these individuals can't be turned away).
Doctors and hospitals pass this cost along to insurance providers, and insurance proivders pass this cost along to policy holders.
I wasn't asking about people who can't afford to pay. I have nothing against a system that ensures those who truly cannot afford it are able to get quality health care regardless of their ability to pay.
I was asking why someone who has employer provided healthcare wants others to pay for his deductible and co pays.
Pointless polls on a forum that skews 75% right wing easily. Why not go poll the Fox News comments section?
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.
