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 is a proposal for "free" healthcare in the U.S. In other countries with "socialized" healthcare, one of the biggest issues and criticism is long wait times and rationing. Some countries create "death panels" to determine who gets what. A fair criticism. But, if the U.S. does create universal healthcare, there would need to be some type of system fair to the taxpayers. To solve the problems of both rationing and taxpayer fairness, the U.S. could create a tier system based on taxes paid. Each year the system issues you an ID card and tier based on the amount of federal income taxes you actually paid the prior year. Let's say there were 5 tiers 1 - 5 with one being the highest/best. If you needed a knee replacement (uncomfortable but not an emergency) and your tax payments put you in the second tier, then you would be put on the list above those in tier 3-5. It would work the same for similar-related ED complaints. Let's say a tier 2 and tier 3 arrive around the same time in the ED both having fallen and hurt their wrist. The tier 2 goes in first. Obviously, a person who is critical would go in ahead of them regardless of the tier. But this makes for a fair, "free" system. Sure, the people who pay no taxes will wait the longest, but they also get the most for nothing. Before you say this this unfairly hurts low income people, note that a rich person who inherited all his money from daddy and pays no income tax himself would be at the same level as a poor person who pays no income tax.
Great idea, great system.
I would be totally in favor this, and think you have a great idea here.
I do think that employers could move someone into a higher tier, provided you still pay something for coverage. If you pay nothing for coverage, you would still have coverage at a Tier 5 level.
Why aren't our politicians proposing an idea like this? It is excellent!
It would be universal in that it covers all citizens and legal residents universally, but not necessarily all medical treatments universally. That's no different from other insurance. Comprehensive car insurance, for example, will cover your entire car and will pay to replace the windshield if it gets hit with a rock from the road. It will not cover your windshield if you intentionally smash it in with baseball bat.
At least in Canada, one of the pillars of UHC is universal access to all medical treatments equally. What you are proposing isn't truly universal as it excludes people from accessing the same treatments as others.
I understand the schadenfreude some feel in punishing people for bad health habits, but it's really just cruel.
You dont die if you are born in a household who cant pay the auto repair bill. You would die as a child if you were born disabled and your parents couldnt pay the price to treat you. Whats so great about that?
So then, set up a gofundme page and ask for donations. Problem solved.
...but no health insurance? I fail to see your logic.
Nope, my job pays for my medical certification as an engineer. If anything wrong, I could lose my license. And I know if something is wrong. So, no, outside of basic with my job, I have no insurance. And will remain that way.
Who decides if the disease is self inflicted? I have always eaten healthy, exercised and am not overweight, yet I still developed type2 diabetes....
Type 2 diabetes develops when the body becomes resistant to insulin or when the pancreas stops producing enough insulin. Exactly why this happens is unknown, although genetics and environmental factors, such as excess weight and inactivity, seem to be contributing factors.
That is the problem we have. There are a lot of things many claim are self inflicted, but it is far more complicated. Diabetes is one due to family history, diet, exercise and X factors we may never know in our life times. Breast cancer is all too common on Long Island, does that make Long Island women who get breast cancer, self-inflicted patients? Also if a suicide attempt is tied to mental issues is that self-inflicted? The other thing is how do we know injuries are because if it is based on word, it can easily be covered up.
I would be totally in favor this, and think you have a great idea here.
I do think that employers could move someone into a higher tier, provided you still pay something for coverage. If you pay nothing for coverage, you would still have coverage at a Tier 5 level.
Why aren't our politicians proposing an idea like this? It is excellent!
The same reason they didn't like UHC for years and don't like ObamaCare, the insurance industry lobby don't like it.
Nope, my job pays for my medical certification as an engineer. If anything wrong, I could lose my license. And I know if something is wrong. So, no, outside of basic with my job, I have no insurance. And will remain that way.
Interesting. And just what does this "basic" cover? Is it free or do you pay a monthly premium?
It would be universal in that it covers all citizens and legal residents universally, but not necessarily all medical treatments universally. That's no different from other insurance. Comprehensive car insurance, for example, will cover your entire car and will pay to replace the windshield if it gets hit with a rock from the road. It will not cover your windshield if you intentionally smash it in with baseball bat.
As they say, stupid is as stupid does!
But you think the bad medical/surgical outcome of a suicide attempt would not be covered by your medical insurance?
I would be totally in favor this, and think you have a great idea here.
I do think that employers could move someone into a higher tier, provided you still pay something for coverage. If you pay nothing for coverage, you would still have coverage at a Tier 5 level.
Why aren't our politicians proposing an idea like this? It is excellent!
It is stupid, probably unconstitutional, and what it does it turns the gov't even more into medical/surgical decision making than it already is.
And the thinking behind it -
That somehow a 'lower tier' of care would be so much cheaper is absurd.
Medical and surgical treatments are based on diagnosis and prognosis, along with established and accepted medical standards of care. Not the ability to pay or tax bracket.
You can take out frills like deluxe meals, rooms with a view or valet parking. But that's peanuts compared to the costs of complicated, chronic and seriously acute medical/surgical problems. Whether that patient be on Medicaid or private insurance.
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.
