You might want to think again about "free" socialist medicine

Believe me, I'm well aware of those systems. I just don't want any part of any of them.

Why is this so difficult to accept?

 

Only left wingers keep saying that free stuff will be paid for by the rich and corporations. They can't tell you how or how much and the price tag, if done that way, would tank the economy but hey, only Bernie has been honest about having to raise everyone's taxes and like he said during the last debate an income of 100,000k with two working would raise taxes about 10,000 a year.

 

With a public option?
Nothing would “happen” to you. Depending on how the system was set up there may be fines for not carrying insurance or being on the public plan — to cut down on non-payments medical service could be denied if you don't have one of the options. Or the system could be set up to automatically place you on a public plan if you don’t have private insurance.

 

Why don’t you want any part of them?
I am curious as to your reasoning.

It’s needed because our current system is bankrupting us.

 

If your taxes are raised by $10,000 but you no longer have $14,000 in family premiums plus $6,000 in family deductibles are you saving money at the end of the year or no?

 

No really true. A comparison of the tax rates might make you think that because the lowest earners here have a rate you do not have but in effect, actually either pay not federal taxes or even get money back from the government due to standard deductions. In effect the tax rate in Australia is one of the highest in the world along with the UK.

US
0 - 9,525 10c for every dollar
9,525 - 38,700 Plus 12c for every dollar over 9,525
38,701 - 82,500 Plus 22c cents for every dollar over 38,701
82,501 - 157,500 plus 24c cents for every dollar over 82,501
157,501 - 200,000 plus 32c cents for every dollar over 157,501

Aus
0 – 18,200 Nil
18,201 – 37,000 19c for each $1 over $18,200
37,001 - 90,000 $3,572 plus 32.5c for each $1 over $37,000
90,001 - 180,000 $20,797 plus 37c for each $1 over $90,000
180,001 and over $54,097 plus 45c for every $1 over $180,000

Effective tax rate for an income of 200K
US 22.84%
Aus 31.55%

 

I pay $900 a year for company health and dental insurance (which Warren wants to eliminate) and $1,700 a year in Medicare taxes. My deduction is $1,000 out of pocket and spend maybe 10-20% for uncovered expenses.

Medicare for all would effectively double the current Federal taxes so that has to come from somewhere.

At my pay, yes 10K a year more would suck.

 

We need to keep our citizens alive before we can protect them.

Do you think that more Americans die from actions of illegal aliens than from lack of proper medical care?

 

I'll phrase this carefully - Would you rather pay for a storage container, that may or may not be accessed, and does nothing but act as a storage container with monthly fees for storing anything, or would you rather pay for the activities that actually provide a benefit to people?

 

No, a Public Option means proposed for general usage and paid-for by a government the financing derived from general taxation.

Meaning like-it or not, benefit-from-it or not, one's taxes pay for the government service.

In the US - just like the DoD. In Europe - just like Healthcare ...

 

Your showing your ignorance of the subject's fundamentals.

If National Healthcare is a cornerstone of the European Union, it is because NHS is considered socially a crucial service to the entire population.

All you can think about is "who pays for it". Yes, taxation supports the Cost of Healthcare. And so?

Any country that wants to join the EU must build a National Healthcare System for its constituents. And common regulation of the system is provided by the EU Commission in Brussels. (As well as start-up financing for new countries entering the EU.)

Which is why the total cost is mostly assumed by National Governments in the EU. And why I only pay $20 to see a GP in France and you pay TEN TIMES THAT AMOUNT in the US! Which means what?

It means that I can easily afford $20 to see a doctor in France, because any further cost of healthcare would also be assumed by the French state. Which you cannot say for yourself if you do not work for a company that has an Employee Healthcare Insurance. Which is financed by what?

The cost is subsumed into overall corporate costs of products/services and is recuperated as such from sales. Meaning EVERYBODY PAYS FOR IT BUT ONLY THE PEOPLE WHO WORK FOR COMPANIES WITH THE INSURANCE GET THE BENEFIT OF COVERAGE.

And, I'll bet, you think, "That's the way the cookie crumbles".

Because you refuse to understand "That is not the way we need to have the cookie crumble". We could have the cost of Healthcare provided in the same manner as is National Defense. Both are equally precious services to the members of any country.

Except that we do not do that in the US - and for no good reason whatsoever ... !

 

how much does that insurance cost your boss/company? if they didn't have to pay those premiums it would increase your salary. iow, those premiums are actually part of your compensation for employment, meaning adding to your gross pay, so if the premium is , say, 1500/month , that's 18k/year and you pay 900 towards the 18k, meaning your salary is actually 17,100/year higher, but the company takes that from you right off the top...

 

It is rather common for one to pay insurance premiums (through their employer) for 20 years. And then get laid off. Soon after a medical need arises, but all of those premiums, paid into over 20 years, are long gone and no longer available.

In a single payer system, one is not shut out during times of brief unemployment.

Talk about the money going to where people actually benefit. In the current system, a good portion of your premiums go to make a few wealthy people more wealthy. Would you not rather that money go to healthcare?

 

You're mixing everything up and are thus confused because you lack knowledge of how political subventions works in a socioeconomic context such as Europe. (Meaning you've swallowed hook, line and sinker the notion that "Only Uncle Sam Does It Right!"*)

Communism was certainly invented before National Health Care. But it is rubbish to believe that just because Communist Russia had free National Healthcare as of the 1920s that it must mean ipso-facto that such healthcare is dead-wrong for any nation. And you refuse to understand that a nation is better off with it than without (like the US). The very fact that American lifespans are lower than the EU speaks to that truth.

You're letting your political sentiments interfere with basic reasoning ...

*Uncle Sam does a lot of things "right". The USA is a far larger economy than the EU, even though the EU is more populated (and therefore has a larger Total Market than the US. Whyzzat so? Because the EU is hobbled with too many rules. More importantly, the US economy is "whole". Whilst the EU economy is fragmented by regional ethnic and linguistic differences that homogenize with great difficulty. But, nonetheless, the EU does two things right that the US gets very wrong: National Healthcare and Virtually Free Postsecondary Education.

 

My premium that I pay is $37.50 a month for health and dental. My medicare is $70.79 a month. You seem to assume a company will automatically just increase someone's pay.

 

I love my free healthcare at the VA. I am currently sitting in a chair waiting my turn for physical therapy.

 

A public option is, as the term implies, an option. The idea being that instead of paying into a for-profit system, one pays into a public system

Because a great deal of one's premiums go to make someone else wealthy, a public option would be more cost effective

This must be scary to corporatists (ie Republicans). Put up the insurance companies against a public option and let people decide. Let people discover, in side by side comparisons, just how much insurance companies are taking money from them.

 

Both Colorado and Utah have long been among the healthiest states in the country. In Utah, healthcare is, in part, subsidized by the Mormons. As well as the church promotes heathy living.

Colorado also promotes healthy living. Almost from its inception, Colorado has had public health programs, mostly out of teaching hospitals. Before Obama Care, there were public health clinics in every county. Consequently, any person could go and get medical care, even if they could not afford it. And for more serious conditions, there are the state hospitals. The state run hospitals, part of the University of Colorado system, are not only some of the best hospitals around, but also the most affordable.

 

You are confusing health CARE and health INSURANCE. They are not the same thing.

Those brief periods of unemployment, are covered under COBRA, and if an employer lays someone off due to a medical claim, which is highly illegal, then they also have cause for legal action. A single payer system limits one's options, the UK has shown proof of that, and there is no reason to think that a single payer system here in the US would not respond the same way. Thank you, I'll pass.

Providing people the means to access actual CARE, and not the front loaded payment mechanism, is the goal IMO. There are many ways to do that that do not involve forcing all citizens into cattle cars for one-size-fits-all treatment. I'd rather see a system that offers direct care for the low/no income group, and options for those who don't want/need taxpayer funded insurance. Catastrophic coverage was plenty for a good number of people, until the government decided people were to stupid to know what coverage they needed or wanted.

 

I personally think a much better option is to either

A.) Deny needed medical care to those who are suffering. This is much more humane
B.) I think its important that we continue to pay some of the highest medical costs in the known world for said care.
C.) It is absolutely imperative that we continue to drive families or individuals into medical bankruptcy for life saving care.

This is what America is all about.

'MERICA!!!




/sarcasm off

 

Where does this crazy idea come from that your tax money should only pay for things you like?

I dont want to pay for tanks and bombs. But I am now arent i. How do I opt out of that?

 

And I agree you should be able to keep that plan if you like it.
The numbers I provided were the national averages — and those people would benefit from a public option.

I pay close to $4k a year in health insurance (self employed) for myself and still have a $7.5k deductible plus copays.
I change plans every year to the cheapest. I would gladly see my taxes rise $10k if the above evaporated.

 

Thats not what a public option is, thats what medicare for all (or whatever term they use) is. If you don’t participate you don’t pay.

 

That's the point now isn't it SOMEONE is paying for it, like the working stiffs! I'm sure everyone would LOVE free stuff it's just some get to go to college, get to enjoy subsidized lives and free medical while the 12 hour a day workers has 60% of their earnings stripped away for things they never get to utilize until their are a breath away from the grave yard..

Screw socialism it's never fair for all!

 

Cars, cars, cars - is that all you-guys can think about?

Of course nothing is "free" as regards particularly services.

But, would you rather go without those health services that prolong your lifespan? Would you rather go without a much less-costly postsecondary degree that gets you a good job rather than not?

A yes-answer to both of those questions is pure and simple foolishness - and that is what Uncle Sam is doing at this moment.

Making a fool of himself - because the rest of the world (particularly China) is racing ahead in terms of upmarket technology that is increasingly a key part of our work-environment - and we would do better inventing (and using it) than buying it from China ...