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.
What I've gotten from the news is there has to be three stages. Though it got 51 votes in reconciliation, it originally got started in part with a 60 vote majority and need a 60 vote majority to bury it.
I think the Republicans bargain within step-1, then they have to request people vote more anti-American Democrat Senators to wipe it out and do other things in step 2.
I see us going back to private insurance and have the elderly and massively disabled covered by Medicare or Medical.
The remainder of workers need to get off of welfare and to start supporting themselves more. I can't see us paying long term others healthcare because they refuse to buy it or earn it.
But auto insurance doesn't cover minor issues like routine maintenance meaning oil changes, brakes, etc, that is strictly out of pocket for the insured. Health care seems to be trying to cover EVERYTHING like a broken finger, annual check up, stitches. You would have to regulate health care to major and catastrophic issues only. I'd be fine with that model btw.
But by the same token, preventative care should mitigate major and expensive health problems.
But it would work like any other insurance model, the healthy pay for the sick.
It already works that way with Medicare, which on average, costs each enrollee $160,000 in prepayments before eligibility for benefits even begins. Some seniors are healthy. Some are ill. Some die before even collecting one thin dime in Medicare benefits even though they paid in for 40+ years.
If people want to buy into Medicare for $160,000 per person, fine.
People who are not working need to learn the value in all work, not just career jobs. If your career job ended you may become a low wage earner if you have limited skills. So wrap those people's heads around the fact that they may have once made $45 an hour as a widget maker, but time marches on and their future may be a low wage job and they may only let lower cost major incident care.
And the reason I made the point that Medicare charges a monthly premium even after decades of prepayments (average of $160,000 per enrollee), only covers 80% of medical costs, and supplemental insurance must be purchased to cover prescriptions, the out-of-pocket gap, etc., is because a LOT of young-ish people are under the impression that Medicare is free and covers everything. Nothing could be further from the truth.
Have a million dollar injury/illness on Medicare parts A and B only with no supplemental private insurance policy? You're on the hook for approximately $200,000. On a fixed income. There is no out-of-pocket maximum.
YES!!! That's the problem! That's why "Medicare for all" would tax them, instead of leaving it up to them. In any healthcare system, you need the healthy people to buoy the costs for everyone else. AND it's useful for them too - they only think they'll be healthy forever.
So, to your second point, this is too complicated to generalize about. Which "million dollar injury" are you talking about that would leave this person on the hook? You know that Medicare doesn't have a flat 20% cost-share for everything across the board, right? Some things have no cost-share, some things have a higher one, some things have a lower one.
What I've gotten from the news is there has to be three stages. Though it got 51 votes in reconciliation, it originally got started in part with a 60 vote majority and need a 60 vote majority to bury it.
I think the Republicans bargain within step-1, then they have to request people vote more anti-American Democrat Senators to wipe it out and do other things in step 2.
I see us going back to private insurance and have the elderly and massively disabled covered by Medicare or Medical. The remainder of workers need to get off of welfare and to start supporting themselves more. I can't see us paying long term others healthcare because they refuse to buy it or earn it.
But that's an entirely different problem, and neither party is going after the waste and abuse of public assistance. In the meantime, health care effects everyone, from mid class to poor and with an aging population it has to be addressed. We can't afford to keep kicking it down the road or fighting ideology or playing politics.
But by the same token, preventative care should mitigate major and expensive health problems.
Sure it should. But its still up to me to pay for that preventative stuff out of my own pocket, and also be incredibly responsible with how I use the vehicle. I'm pretty sure there are some people out there that treat their cars better than they treat their own bodies.
It already works that way with Medicare, which on average, costs each enrollee $160,000 in prepayments before eligibility for benefits even begins. Some seniors are healthy. Some are ill. Some die before even collecting one thin dime in Medicare benefits even though they paid in for 40+ years.
If people want to buy into Medicare for $160,000 per person, fine.
But that's what I'm saying, you wouldn't have to buy in, health insurance companies accept new customers everyday. They might contract cancer the week after signing up but many more will pay into it for their lifetime with no claims.
YES!!! That's the problem! That's why "Medicare for all" would tax them, instead of leaving it up to them. In any healthcare system, you need the healthy people to buoy the costs for everyone else. AND it's useful for them too - they only think they'll be healthy forever.
So how would they be taxed differently than everyone else? If you propose to tax everyone the same, then that means you need to refund all the Medicare taxes anyone has paid to date, plus interest, or you're placing an unfair burden on those who prepaid $160,000 or more for access to Medicare benefits.
Quote:
So, to your second point, this is too complicated to generalize about. Which "million dollar injury" are you talking about that would leave this person on the hook? You know that Medicare doesn't have a flat 20% cost-share for everything across the board, right? Some things have no cost-share, some things have a higher one, some things have a lower one.
But by the same token, preventative care should mitigate major and expensive health problems.
You get what you pay for. Unless massively disabled or elderly for nothing you should get almost nothing.
The issue is that there isn't enough money to pay for other people's bills everywhere.
National programs for health collapse all over the place. I've seen it through Europe.
The only short term successes have been lower populated raw material rich countries where raw materials have brought in so much money that they can do a national healthcare until the flow of income slows.
Here in America Obama dug our hole x2 at $10,000,000,000,000 more. We have no excess, so national care is a non-starter every day of the week.
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.
