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.
Yes, and unions. Union members balked at paying the cadillac tax on their health care plans, and they vote Dem, so Obama gave them an exception.
This is why M4A and stripping everyone of their private health insurance will never happen. The unions won't give up their cadillac private health care plans for wait-in-line one-size-fits-all assembly line government health care à la the VA.
Private sector union members are 6.4% of the US workforce.
And public employees (union members and/or have cushy health care benefits) are 15.2% of the US workforce.
That's 21.6% of the US workforce.
Right now, the Cadillac Tax is scheduled to take effect in 2022. It sought to impose a 40% excise tax on employers who sponsor plans that cost more than $11,200/ year for an individual or $30,150 for a family plan. The tax is only on that portion of the benefit in excess of the defined threshold. It is believed that most employers would choose less costly plans to avoid the tax which would mean higher deductibles and co-pays.
Some seem to believe that wages would increase if the healthcare benefit decreased. If that were to occur the employees would pay more in taxes.
Studies have shown that people with such planes use healthcare more so than those employees who have more skin in the game.
Not all employees covered under collective bargaining agreements have employer sponsored plans that would qualify for this tax. Despite it being a common Republican claim, the tax, if enacted, impacts far more non- unionized employees than those covered under collective bargaining agreements.
Kaiser estimated that 25% of all US employees have plans that would be subject to the 40% “ Cadillac tax”, if enacted.
The US Chamber of Commerce, no friend of organized labor, fiercely opposes the tax as do most Republicans and Democrats.
The House voted to abolish the not yet imposed tax, 419-6. The Senate has a companion bill with 61 sponsors. The only supporters of the tax are deficit hawks.
McConnell has been sitting on these bills, despite strong bipartisan support. Bipartisan support does not play well in the sandbox in an election year where politicians and the medias that feed off them, push the partisan narrative.
Wasn't that how Obamacare ended up working for people connected to Obama?
How so?
Eliminating preexisting conditions, capping annual out of pocket expenses including deductible, eliminating the annual/ lifetime cap on claims and capping insurer profits benefitted only those “ connected to Obama”? Who knew?
Dental and vision are different from health insurance, you know this, you're just being dishonest
That depends. Countries with Universal Healthcare may or may not include dental and vision care.
No two countries use the same strategy to deliver Universal Healthcare. A few rely entirely on private insurance. Most rely on a mixed bad of private and public insurance. Some countries mandate employer contributions some do not. I am hard- pressed to name a country that is true Single Payer that includes all healthcare AND does not rely on private insurance for some things.
This includes China.
Inclusions and exclusions vary country to country.
M4A ideology seems to seek to cover everything in the fattest and third most populous country in the world. It’s DOA.
Last edited by middle-aged mom; 12-11-2019 at 10:15 AM..
It's too scary to do such big change in one go, that's why Warren is having her poll problem.
Why can't we do that in one state that favors it like CA, or one region that favors it like CA OR & WA, or an isolated place like Hawaii, and see how that works out first?
If in fact this can be done without middle class tax, it would not matter to the people, right?
And I don't think too many people will move just for the sake of healthcare... we already have bigger differential between states. CA has 13.3% top personal income tax while 7 other states have none, and CA is still chugging along.
I'd be all for this. Let's start with CA, OR or WA. Or even just WA. I also thought lowering the age to 60, then 55, 50 every four years would be good too but we wouldn't want 60 year olds in the South to benefit from socialism. /sarc
Reality is, Medicare beneficiaries only pay about a third of the benefits they receive. The rest is paid for by taxpayers.
Did you read the word "supplemental". Try to put 65+ year olds on private insurance, report back.
Medicare evolved because private insurers declined, despite that most diseases that are now treatable and sometimes curable, were fatal, back then.
Paul Ryan, former VP candidate and Speaker of the House, pushed for Medicare vouchers to replace Medicare. The vouchers were to be used to pay for private insurance.
Private insurers declined being the primary payer for senior healthcare risks.
Private insurers do however, aggressively compete as it relates to Supplimental and Advantage plans and do so because it is highly profitable.
Regarding the bold, exactly. M4A advocates fail to understand that.
Seems to me those who advocate for M4A, don’t understand how Medicare for seniors works and seem to expect 1% to pay for 99%. They also seem to believe the federal government would impose across the board wage and price controls on healthcare providers and ban private insurance.
And somehow Bernie or whomever will make it happen.
Eliminating preexisting conditions, capping annual out of pocket expenses including deductible, eliminating the annual/ lifetime cap on claims and capping insurer profits benefitted only those “ connected to Obama”? Who knew?
Yeah, and some morons still claim insurance companies wrote it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by FirebirdCamaro1220
Dental and vision are different from health insurance, you know this, you're just being dishonest
No, you're being dishonest.
Every single incarnation of Medicare-for-All includes dental and vision. And hearing. And podiatry (which is currently not covered). And in fact, everything except cosmetic surgeries and procedures, and it probably won't be too long before those are included, too, because we all know how Liberals are: If she doesn't get a boob-job then she'll feel bad about herself and her mental health will suffer so we must pay for boobies (and nose jobs and tummy tucks and face-lifts...).
It also includes paying the cost of transporting people to and from any medical facility or provider.
I don't get that either. For many seniors, Medicare premiums, copays, and/or supplemental insurance to cover what Medicare doesn't is a major monthly expense.[/QUOTE]
Yeah, try to put those same seniors on private insurance and then report back. I project x 5 the current cost, lol.
The "same seniors" that paid into Medicare for ~40 years before they ever had any Part A coverage? You saying they haven't paid for their coverage to begin with?
My wife and I are currently paying $135 per month for Part B(80% that Part A doesn't cover), plus another $184 per month to cover the rest. That's after paying well over six figures into Part A coverage over 40 years each. Up until now we haven't cost the plan anywhere near that much in benefits. If we pass tomorrow, Medicare keeps all that money to use for other people in the plan. At that point we don't care, but don't screw with our benefits before then. Bankrupting the system by adding beneficiaries that have not contributed screws with our benefits.
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.
