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.
Percentages be damned. It would be just another giant scheme. Figure out the numbers and you will see that there is NO WAY that approx. 51% of the population of this country can pay for 100% of all the health care with a 2.2% increase in taxes. I wish I could remember where I read it (maybe here and someone still has the link), but it read that it would cost each TAX-paying citizen approx 30K per year to just break even with such a plan. I don't know about you but an additional 20K a year in taxes means this family starts eating Alpo bought on double coupon day. That's the problem with your idea. As always, it's a noble idea but the devil is in the details, and the single payer system just doesn't work financially with a progressive tax system where not everyone pays..... You want single payer...then every SINGLE person must pay. Plain and simple....
There was more to it than the 2.2% payroll tax fifure, but that was the across the board amount mwntioned and the impact of middle class taxpayers, which us what was mentioned in the post I was responding to.
What have any of you heard from some of the Democratic congress people on how to fix Obamacare?
Well maybe if Trump and republicans had asked they would have helped them. But they weren't interested in working with democrats. So they just sat back and watched the implosion of trumpcare.
Its not "Obamacare" its "governmentcare" and you fix it by eliminating government completely from medical care sans basics on financial and safety regulations. You let the market determine prices, and you let the market fill the gap on those who are in special situations.
The only two markets that are beyond f'd up in terms of cost and price inflation are healthcare and higher education. Coincidentally, these are the same two markets that the federal government cant stop trying to manipulate. The solution should be obvious, less federal government.
So, private individuals contracting with private insurance companies to provide private insurance policies to be used to pay private health care providers, is governmentcare?
Your accusation that government is the problem is completely undercut by the examples of every other country, all have HIGHER levels of government intervention and they all provide better medical outcomes at lower cost. Perhaps it isn't government that's the problem but profit based insurance that's the problem?
Does anyone see the mandate as a problem? If so in what way?
The idea that health insurance is just some "product" like cable or a cellphone and that people shouldn't be required to have is ridiculous and defies logic. No one choses to become sick or injured. I work in health care and every day I see people who are in perfect health, people who exercise, eat right and don't smoke get seriously ill or injured and many rack up HUGE health care bills.
Every single human body is fallible and can become sick or injured at any time. Not having health insurance in a country that is required to and will treat you at any ER is the height of irresponsibility. These people expect others to pay for their care if something happens. If people don't want to buy health insurance then we should end EMTALA. If someone has no insurance, they should recieve no care unless they can prove they have the funds to cover all necessary treatment.
The mandate was originally a conservative idea based on personal responsibilty. The concept of the individual health insurance mandate originated at the conservative Heritage Foundation. In 1993, Republicans twice introduced health care bills that contained an individual health insurance mandate. A strong mandate would reduce rates dramatically and prevent people from being irresponsible and forcing the taxpayers to pay for them if they end up needing care. Democrats were the ones originally opposed to a mandate.
Risk pools are limited to each state. Same with provider pools. Small risk pools are more expensive and more volatile. If insurance companies can be cross-state, they can have larger risk pools which will even out costs. Same with the provider pools - insurance companies that have a limited set of providers (hospitals, doctors, etc.) can be more expensive depending on the providers. People will have more options if restrictions were loosened up.
That makes no sense, high risk pools are horribly expensive. If you put 100,000 people who had cancer in a great big high risk pool how will it be cheaper than a pool for 10,000 with similar medical histories? Insurance companies will set premiums based on the assumption that every one of those people stands a good chance to have a recurrence of cancer, or that they have a higher probability than the general population to get an entirely new illness. When there are no healthy people in the pool to offset that risk, the premiums are insanely high.
Risk pools are limited to each state. Same with provider pools. Small risk pools are more expensive and more volatile. If insurance companies can be cross-state, they can have larger risk pools which will even out costs. Same with the provider pools - insurance companies that have a limited set of providers (hospitals, doctors, etc.) can be more expensive depending on the providers. People will have more options if restrictions were loosened up.
Here's a better idea, instead of fragmenting pools of people trying to lower costs, just do 1 national pool. Everyone in the same pool. That's single payer.
The more simple you can architect a system the less paperwork/adminstrative costs associated. Plus with the largest pool (the entire population), that provides huge leverage to reduce prices darastically.
I keep hearing people saying that Obamacare needs to be fixed. But I haven't heard much about how to actually fix it. So how should it be fixed?
The obvious solution is single payer plan. If both parties weren't bought out by the insurance companies and pharma this would have passed with bipartisan support ages ago.
The obvious solution is single payer plan. If both parties weren't bought out by the insurance companies and pharma this would have passed with bipartisan support ages ago.
Democrats want a single payer system, republicans don't.
I keep hearing people saying that Obamacare needs to be fixed. But I haven't heard much about how to actually fix it. So how should it be fixed?
$20 co-pays and my old $320 a month Premiums and I'd be a happy camper!
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.
