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.
Bernie Sanders suggested a gap between 127k-250k and then the payroll tax kicks in after 250k.
Regardless, the medicare tax is taxed on all income with no cap. People who pay many millions in Medicare taxes over their lifetimes dont get some unique and special Medicare that others dont get. The cap on income subject to SS should work similarly. As inquality continues to increase, more and more of the national income is no longer subject to SS taxes as the top 1% hoard a larger and larger share of total income.
I just wish they'd stop using flat income numbers for these calculations. It always unfairly targets the high income/high COL areas. For the job I do and the money I make, it would probably be $40K less in an area such as, say, Indiana. There is an equivalent job there for me but I don't want to live there, my entire family is where I am now and I like it. But I pay a lot more for housing, gas, physicians, vet bills, home repairs, etc (see the gas thread from yesterday), and generally everything else except for standard items. Yet when the ideas are discussed about who can pay more for something, I always get hit because of my income level due to where I live. They need an COL factor on these things.
6 of 1, 1/2 dozen of the other - which do you prefer?
Societies with full heath care and other such human rights spend about 40% of their GDP on taxes.
We spend 26%, but if you add in the 11K per person, debt and everything else, we spend as much or more...just that we put our heads in the sand and charge it off to our children and grandkids.
So the real question is whether we wish to pay the bills of a civil society. So far the answer is no. We'd rather pay more for less and fool ourselves that we are independent.
The crazy thing is that we actually pay more in taxes for our current health care system than other countries pay in taxes to provide healthcare for everyone. Thats how inefficient our system is. We allow private providers to rip off the tax payer (Medicare, VA, Medicaid, government workers health insurance) and claim that nothing can be done about it. Baloney. We must muster the guts to take on the vested health care interests that rip off the American people. We know Trump is a wimp who cowardly retreated once he came into office. Now the rest of the puppets must go as well.
President Trump's empty promises (lies) about his health insurance plans now become evident as Americans, wittingly or not, face more expensive and worse health insurance programs.
Trump's promises: <<Lost amid the pundits’ applause for President Trump’s calmer demeanor in his speech to Congress Tuesday was a key shift that received far less national attention: the abandonment of promises made by candidate and President-elect Trump on healthcare.
“We’re going to have insurance for everybody,” Trump said in press conference Jan. 11. “We’re going to have a healthcare that is far less expensive and far better.”
Or, as he said in a September 2015 “60 Minutes” interview, “I am going to take care of everybody. Everybody’s going to be taken care of much better than they’re taken care of now.”>>
A Yahoo article this morning explains what the Republican Trumpcare solutions actually mean for millions of Americans. It's sad and scary reading. Trumpcare essentially is cheap health insurance for the healthy; too bad if you actually need health care insurance.
<<President Donald Trump has crowed about dismantling the Affordable Care Act, even as he has failed to repeal it. But his efforts on health care, so far, are likely to hurt people who aren’t even covered by the ACA.
One group of health-care consumers have had a rough go during the last several years: The 6.7 million Americans who aren’t covered by an employer, who buy insurance on the individual market and who earn too much money to qualify for subsidies under the ACA. These folks tend to be self-employed or work as independent contractors, and insurance premiums for a husband and wife can top $20,000 or even $30,000 a year. Those between 55 and 64 tend to pay the most. (Medicare kicks in once people turn 65.)
Trump wants to help people trim their health-insurance bill, and he has introduced several measures that will help — but only for people who don’t get hurt or sick. People who have pre-existing conditions, or want a comprehensive policy, won’t enjoy any savings. >>
Many Americans may be getting "cheaper" insurance, but they likely will receive limited benefits:
<<Opting for one of the new plans will typically be cheaper — but they’ll cover far less. For starters, temporary and skinny plans generally don’t cover pre-existing conditions. They also offer limited or no coverage for things such as maternity care, substance abuse and mental health treatment. Some of these plans also put a cap on the amount they’ll pay out, so they don’t really cover catastrophic care. “These plans cover a few illnesses, but they’re not really insurance,” says Sara Collins of the Commonwealth Fund. “People don’t always know what they’re getting.”>>
All Americans will suffer to the extent that sick Americans incur unpaid bills at hospitals and other healthcare providers and as collection expenses soar and are passed on to all insurance programs and patients. Sick Americans won't receive needed treatments, impairing their ability to work and likely once again burdening emergency rooms with patients seeking primary care.
Despite campaign promises, Trump has blocked efforts at price controls on drugs. Drug prices remain much higher in the U.S. than in Canada and Europe and much, much higher than markets such as China and India.
Here's another article about the reality of Trumpcare and the consequences of destroying Obamacare.
We dont need Medicare for all. Its a system that has many flaws and in my experience it stinks.
I will not dispute your personal experience. I realize that you know from first hand experience.
For myself, I actually have co-workers who are old enough to qualify for Medicare (no one can afford to retire) and they have all switched to it because it is better than the company policy. The biggest benefit for younger people would be that they can switch jobs without losing coverage, reducing their own family's vulnerability as they strive to improve their circumstances.
In light of the fact that we have nothing better in place and functioning at the moment I would say Medicare for all would be an improvement for most people. We could enhance the program over time, especially with independent oversight.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Williepaws
For starters ,We need a health ins system that has buying power for drugs, yes. We need a medical system where hospitals are fair in their pricing structure. We need a medical system where the dr looks at the whole patient not only the age, disease process etc. we need a medical system where big pharma isnt promoting every new drug under the sun. And we need to get rid of the drug ads off tv. All of that for starters but none of it is going to happen because this is a capitalistic society and capitalism rules all.
I don't disagree with any of your post except to say that we are better off with a mixed economy, the free market has it's own advantages. I must say people's health is too serious a matter to leave to profiteers and is not the kind of thing one can shop around for so some national plan should be in place.
If Israel can have national health care and we are subsidizing them, we should have it.
States that didn't get on board with ACA have seen rural hospitals close at a steady rate. When the only people with insurance are those on Medicare, hospitals just can't afford to stay open.
Medical practices close when the hospitals close.
In the not so distant future, in many rural area, the only person in the community with any medical training with be the local pharmacists. If there is an urgent care clinic connected to the pharmacy, there might be some P.A.s as well.
However, urgent care clinics are for prescribing antibiotics, casting broken arms. They aren't equipped for heart attacks, strokes, childbirth, ... Whether they can stay open in communities where there is not a single hospital with an emergency room to refer to remains to be seen.
Which essentially means, that without a viable insurance option for low-income rural residents, they will have limited, if any, access to medical care.
All part of the, "Make America as Great as Somalia" plan.
ACA was written and approved by the insurance companies.
If ACA is such a bad deal for insurers, why are they raking in billions in profits?
If ACA is such a bad deal for big pharma, why are they raking in billions in profits?
If ACA is such a bad deal for consumers, why are they paying thousands in premiums and deductibles, never reaching the point where insurance companies start kicking in?
Oh wait .... right.
The ACA was criminal. It was extortion for the American people. And most are too brainwashed to ever *get it*, still arguing clinton, bush, obama, trump and hillary. Which is exactly where the corporations want the *debate*. All about the spokespeople, never about the issue.
All part of the, "Make America as Great as Somalia" plan.
Unless they are government jobs, jobs in rural areas rarely include employer-paid insurance.
As a result, rural hospitals are steadily closing. Generally, starts with the maternity ward as this is rarely a money making unit since many of those birthing babies don't have insurance and even those who do, generally only have Medicaid.
This is the first sign a hospital is in financial trouble and it often isn't long until it closes down altogether.
Happening at a faster pace in states that didn't sign up for ACA, but it is happening in rural areas all across the country.
All those rural folks who insist the gubmit shouldn't be involved in insurance would be wise to come up with an alternative plan, because the current one is leaving them hours from medical care for strokes, heart attacks, child birth, ...
If Israel can have national health care and we are subsidizing them, we should have it.
Agreed. Congress should be slashing foreign involvement and implementing competitive policies in order to make U.S. healthcare comparably affordable to all other developed nations.
Until people admit the medical industry is a scam, prices will remain high. Yes, you must admit your doctor is a scam artist too. In bed with the pharma companies convincing you you have illnesses that don't really exist so they can put you on medication you don't really need. While the government continues to promote your unhealthy, bread, grains, and vegetables diet that only makes you less healthy.
Well some people most likely do need those medications but in general I agree with you. In my experience the illness is often real but the treatment for it is not so a lot of their diagnoses are accurate however they don't inform you of alternate ways of treating it.
I have free insurance but I still try to avoid going to the doctor as much as I can and then even when I do I wonder why I even bothered because I always end up paying for it somehow just not in money.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Williepaws
We need a medical system where the dr looks at the whole patient not only the age, disease process etc. we need a medical system where big pharma isnt promoting every new drug under the sun. And we need to get rid of the drug ads off tv. All of that for starters but none of it is going to happen because this is a capitalistic society and capitalism rules all.
Well that's what holistic doctors are for I think but unfortunately they are not covered by health insurance.
I see the drug ads as a warning though. If we don't get rid of the dangerous drugs, I'm not sure what getting rid of the ads would do because then you don't have that easily accessible information about side effects. I mean you can google it but I think it's better for people who take drugs to have it in their face before they decide to go on that drug.
Dear everyone posting in this thread. Please remember that not one single law passed in the US since 1970 has been about you and I getting better access to healthcare and everything GOVERNMENT has done, has caused the cost of Healthcare to rise faster than the cost of living...
think about that for a minute.
(PS there is nothing partisan about this post. In fact we have 100% bipartisan agreement on screwing the American public)
Well, sure there is.
Republicans insisted for many many years - in fact, most of all time, that the US had the very best health care in the world - bar none.
Just because you claim "they always knew" does not make it so.
The ACA and RomneyCare and many other programs surely HAVE given better access to health care to millions. Even my higher-end health insurance (note - I am upper-middle class) didn't have the preventative care measures that the ACA does (included physical and much much more)...
Now - if you want to claim with validity that some state governments...mostly those in the Confederacy....have rejected the ACA and Medicare program which would help their populations - that is a truism. But don't blame that on the Dems and the ACA and Medicare. You can't force people to lose their ignorance. If they elect pols who want to see them suffer, die and pay much more...that's on them.
The "they are all the same" argument is very tired. Progressives did SS, Medicare, SCHIP, ADA, ACA and many other things which helped human beings. Republicans, as a whole (especially in the last 20 years) have been dead set against this...and, in fact, based their entire agenda on same.
These things are NOT the same. We cannot agree on them.
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.
