Single payer in Cali?

[Two Thumbs]

I don't understand. Business is run by people, and government is run by people. Both are at risk of going out of business - in effect losing their job. Mayors, governors, legislators, etc. can be recalled and face reelection on a regualr basis. Government, by law, must be open to the public, not so a private business.

The government can not go out of business. A state union employee must go out of their way to lose thier job.

a personal story;

I did csr work for a company that did Med Sup Part D in CA [ironically]. We had 250 - 300 totla csr. Each week we go 1-2 calls where the customer advised us that they were not dead. Medicare had declared them dead and cancelled thier insurance. Now we did what we could to help, and at the speed of government the got thier ins back in ~ 3 months, assuming they didn't die w/o thier meds in the mean time.

Now tell me you want the same people running ALL your health ins cradle to the grave.

Are you suggesting similar problems don't occur in the private sector?

My point was policy makers - not clerks - would lose their jobs; policy makers do when they fail to perform. It happens every election, incumbents lose and others take their place, some even are recalled. In effect a new government replaces the old, tantamount to how new businesses spring up when others fail.

How many entitlment programs, once started, have been eliminated by whoever came after them?

You don't need to google or anything. I have never heard of any that ended, and I doubt any ever have. But if you do know of one, I'd like to see why.

 

[daveman]

These plans can't work. How many States have tried and how many work as they are advertised?? They are full of Unintended Consequences.

Those who can buy premiums end up having to pay more to cover the costs of those who can't pay. I don't know about you but I'm not interested in paying anyones HC costs anymore than I want to pay the mortgage, rent or send their kids to college.

Obamacare will be the same damnend thing.

Sure hope the SC finds that clusterfuck unconstitutional because if it doesn't anyone who can pay is going to the poorhouse.

"No, no, it'll work great this time. Honest! No, really!"

Right, USMB lefties?

 

[Provocateur]

id just like to point out that anachronism just told everyone who cant afford insurance, fuck you too bad.

Yes. Yes, I did.



Even better. Now, rather than paying a percentage of my healthcare expense (20-35%) through my employer, I'm going to be paying 100% of it PLUS the cost of the lazy, worthless sacks of shit who don't pay any taxes to begin with. This just keeps getting better and better.

So rather than paying $25 (20%) a week to my employer, I'll be paying 100% ($125 a week, $6500 a year) of my own bill, plus probably another 50% (at least) of someone else's. Gee, I'd really like to pay $10,000 a year for my (and someone else's) health care rather than paying $1300 a year for just mine. NO THANKS.

so because more people are paying for services, costs will go up. well yes...... that true, but since more people are paying for services the burden to the state goes down..... more money in from the plan holders (i.e. by paying taxes that go towards the system) = less money needed from the state.

More people will NOT be paying into the system. I have a very hard time believing that the lower tax bracket people will be forced to pay their fair share in this. As always the burden will end up on the middle and upper income brackets to pay for the worthless wastes of flesh and oxygen in the lower brackets.

glad to see your company is footing the bill. i hope they eliminate your benefits because costs get too high and then you cant afford HC. then you become part of the millions of uninsured and, actually that would be like saying fuck you to yourself!

Wow. You are psycho.


Did you know that the latest estimate is that 30% of employers will discontinue coverage starting 2014 because of Obamacare.

That is 10s of millions of people.

Perhaps you can have a celebratory party.

 

[daveman]

Yes. Yes, I did.



Even better. Now, rather than paying a percentage of my healthcare expense (20-35%) through my employer, I'm going to be paying 100% of it PLUS the cost of the lazy, worthless sacks of shit who don't pay any taxes to begin with. This just keeps getting better and better.

So rather than paying $25 (20%) a week to my employer, I'll be paying 100% ($125 a week, $6500 a year) of my own bill, plus probably another 50% (at least) of someone else's. Gee, I'd really like to pay $10,000 a year for my (and someone else's) health care rather than paying $1300 a year for just mine. NO THANKS.



More people will NOT be paying into the system. I have a very hard time believing that the lower tax bracket people will be forced to pay their fair share in this. As always the burden will end up on the middle and upper income brackets to pay for the worthless wastes of flesh and oxygen in the lower brackets.

glad to see your company is footing the bill. i hope they eliminate your benefits because costs get too high and then you cant afford HC. then you become part of the millions of uninsured and, actually that would be like saying fuck you to yourself!

Wow. You are psycho.


Did you know that the latest estimate is that 30% of employers will discontinue coverage starting 2014 because of Obamacare.

That is 10s of millions of people.

Perhaps you can have a celebratory party.

But...but The One said we could keep our coverage if we liked it!


Looks like he lied. Yet again. That's okay -- the Troo Beleevers will excuse him for it.

 

[Skynet]

Yes. Yes, I did.



Even better. Now, rather than paying a percentage of my healthcare expense (20-35%) through my employer, I'm going to be paying 100% of it PLUS the cost of the lazy, worthless sacks of shit who don't pay any taxes to begin with. This just keeps getting better and better.

So rather than paying $25 (20%) a week to my employer, I'll be paying 100% ($125 a week, $6500 a year) of my own bill, plus probably another 50% (at least) of someone else's. Gee, I'd really like to pay $10,000 a year for my (and someone else's) health care rather than paying $1300 a year for just mine. NO THANKS.



More people will NOT be paying into the system. I have a very hard time believing that the lower tax bracket people will be forced to pay their fair share in this. As always the burden will end up on the middle and upper income brackets to pay for the worthless wastes of flesh and oxygen in the lower brackets.

glad to see your company is footing the bill. i hope they eliminate your benefits because costs get too high and then you cant afford HC. then you become part of the millions of uninsured and, actually that would be like saying fuck you to yourself!

Wow. You are psycho.


Did you know that the latest estimate is that 30% of employers will discontinue coverage starting 2014 because of Obamacare.

That is 10s of millions of people.

Perhaps you can have a celebratory party.

haha im not the one who told every american if you cant afford health insurance, well tough luck. or did you miss that post? i bet he couldnt afford insurance without his employer paying the majority of it. he should get what he deserves for not caring about anyone but himself.

my employer helps pay my premium and i feel lucky that he does. i dont tell everyone else to fuck off and its too bad that he pays for some of it and they cant afford it. i could still afford health care if he didnt pay a portion. if that were the case am i suppose to demoize those who get it subsidized through their employer. wake up and think about someone else besides yourself for once in your life.

 

[Claudette]

Wait till the premiums on he and his family go through the roof and he's headed for the poorhouse along with anyone else who can pay.

I'm sure he'll head there happily knowing he's footing the bills for the freeloaders.

 

[Skynet]

glad to see your company is footing the bill. i hope they eliminate your benefits because costs get too high and then you cant afford HC. then you become part of the millions of uninsured and, actually that would be like saying fuck you to yourself!

Wow. You are psycho.


Did you know that the latest estimate is that 30% of employers will discontinue coverage starting 2014 because of Obamacare.

That is 10s of millions of people.

Perhaps you can have a celebratory party.

But...but The One said we could keep our coverage if we liked it!


Looks like he lied. Yet again. That's okay -- the Troo Beleevers will excuse him for it.

please point me out to where it says that you are going to loose the ability to purchase that exact same plan on the open market? youre just gonna have to go a different route to get that plan instead of taking the charity of your employer.

 

[Provocateur]

glad to see your company is footing the bill. i hope they eliminate your benefits because costs get too high and then you cant afford HC. then you become part of the millions of uninsured and, actually that would be like saying fuck you to yourself!

Wow. You are psycho.


Did you know that the latest estimate is that 30% of employers will discontinue coverage starting 2014 because of Obamacare.

That is 10s of millions of people.

Perhaps you can have a celebratory party.

But...but The One said we could keep our coverage if we liked it!


Looks like he lied. Yet again. That's okay -- the Troo Beleevers will excuse him for it.

* June 15, 2009,

Obama: ‘If You Like Your Doctor, You Can Keep Your Doctor’

Obama: ‘If You Like Your Doctor, You Can Keep Your Doctor’ - Washington Wire - WSJ



McKinsey Quartlery

A bigger effect than expected

As we have seen, a Congressional Budget Office report estimated that only 9 million to 10 million people, or about 7 percent of employees, currently covered by ESI would have to switch to subsidized exchange policies in 2014. Most surveys of employers likewise show relatively low interest in shifting employees from traditional ESI.

Our survey found, however, that 45 to 50 percent of employers say they will definitely or probably pursue alternatives to ESI in the years after 2014. Those alternatives include dropping coverage, offering it through a defined-contribution model, or in effect offering it only to certain employees. More than 30 percent of employers overall, and 28 percent of large ones, say they will definitely or probably drop coverage after 2014.

https://www.mckinseyquarterly.com/How_US_health_care_reform_will_affect_employee_benefits_2813

 

[Anachronism]

glad to see your company is footing the bill. i hope they eliminate your benefits because costs get too high and then you cant afford HC. then you become part of the millions of uninsured and, actually that would be like saying fuck you to yourself!

I'm a Union employee of a private company so those benefits aren't going anywhere.

Oh, and I HAVE paid 100% of my healthcare plan in the past, when I worked as a contractor; so I have been down that road, thank you very much. Not the most pleasant experience, but I made sure that the money was there for it, because I do need the insurance. Even when it meant that a bunch of the things I would have liked to have or do had to be put on the back burner in order to afford it.

 

[Provocateur]

glad to see your company is footing the bill. i hope they eliminate your benefits because costs get too high and then you cant afford HC. then you become part of the millions of uninsured and, actually that would be like saying fuck you to yourself!

Wow. You are psycho.


Did you know that the latest estimate is that 30% of employers will discontinue coverage starting 2014 because of Obamacare.

That is 10s of millions of people.

Perhaps you can have a celebratory party.

haha im not the one who told every american if you cant afford health insurance, well tough luck. or did you miss that post? i bet he couldnt afford insurance without his employer paying the majority of it. he should get what he deserves for not caring about anyone but himself.

my employer helps pay my premium and i feel lucky that he does. i dont tell everyone else to fuck off and its too bad that he pays for some of it and they cant afford it. i could still afford health care if he didnt pay a portion. if that were the case am i suppose to demoize those who get it subsidized through their employer. wake up and think about someone else besides yourself for once in your life.

So the ultimate plan was always universal suffering and lack of healthcare for all?

Thanks for clearing that up. More of class warfare that liberals think benefits the country somehow and makes us a greater nation.

You got what you wanted. You should have a party.

 

[auditor0007]

what do you see as a solution to these problems?

I'll assume you are talking to me.

Everything the government touches causes an increase in cost.

Get the government uninvolved, including the states and let it go from there.

How do I know this will work?

TX has the nations lowest premiums. Why? B/c every ins co is allowed to be there.

Competion brings down cost.

Texas also has the highest percentage of uninsured, leading the nation at close to 27%. This basically tells us that insurance companies that operate in Texas have been successful at keeping those at the highest risk from being insured, thereby reducing the costs for everyone else. If your answer to lower premiums is keeping more people uninsured, then Texas is a great example of how to do it.

Uninsured: Highest Percentage in Texas, Lowest in Mass.

 

[Skynet]

glad to see your company is footing the bill. i hope they eliminate your benefits because costs get too high and then you cant afford HC. then you become part of the millions of uninsured and, actually that would be like saying fuck you to yourself!

I'm a Union employee of a private company so those benefits aren't going anywhere.

Oh, and I HAVE paid 100% of my healthcare plan in the past, when I worked as a contractor; so I have been down that road, thank you very much. Not the most pleasant experience, but I made sure that the money was there for it, because I do need the insurance. Even when it meant that a bunch of the things I would have liked to have or do had to be put on the back burner in order to afford it.

so you just admitted your part of the one of those evil fascist unions? damn those are terrible things, are all conservatives against unions and collective bargaining? shouldnt you be rallying again unions and their power?

so tell me, do i get to say fuck you, too bad. if they cut your benefits and you can no longer afford health insurance?

 

[daveman]

please point me out to where it says that you are going to loose the ability to purchase that exact same plan on the open market? youre just gonna have to go a different route to get that plan instead of taking the charity of your employer.

And it'll cost you more.

"If you like your health care plan, you can keep your health care plan."
Barack Obama on Tuesday, August 11th, 2009 in a town hall meeting

 

[PLYMCO_PILGRIM]

Single-Payer in California? | Truthout

As long as it is done at the state level and not the federal level like obamacare I take no issue.

the fed has no constitional authority to be involved in health care.

 

[Two Thumbs]

what do you see as a solution to these problems?

I'll assume you are talking to me.

Everything the government touches causes an increase in cost.

Get the government uninvolved, including the states and let it go from there.

How do I know this will work?

TX has the nations lowest premiums. Why? B/c every ins co is allowed to be there.

Competion brings down cost.

Texas also has the highest percentage of uninsured, leading the nation at close to 27%. This basically tells us that insurance companies that operate in Texas have been successful at keeping those at the highest risk from being insured, thereby reducing the costs for everyone else. If your answer to lower premiums is keeping more people uninsured, then Texas is a great example of how to do it.

Uninsured: Highest Percentage in Texas, Lowest in Mass.

How many of those are illegals, and how many chose not to be covered?

 

[Two Thumbs]

Single-Payer in California? | Truthout

As long as it is done at the state level and not the federal level like obamacare I take no issue.

the fed has no constitional authority to be involved in health care.

You pay to support romneycare now and you will pay to support calicare.

 

[Wry Catcher]

This idea that non-profit is some how cheaper is nuts.

the governemnt always costs more than for profit companies. Why? B/c they have to worry about going out of business, while the governement doesnt'.

I don't understand. Business is run by people, and government is run by people. Both are at risk of going out of business - in effect losing their job. Mayors, governors, legislators, etc. can be recalled and face reelection on a regualr basis. Government, by law, must be open to the public, not so a private business.

The Govt is always backed by the tax dollar. They can't go out of business.

Private companies can.

Governments fail, see Greece. Rarely do they disappear, but can and do devolve into chaos.

But the argument that government costs more because it can't go out of business suggests deficit spending is legal, which it is not. By law (to my knowledge) all states and their sub-divisions need to have a balanced budget. This can be done by raising revenue, generally raising taxes, or by cutting services, or some combination. However, by tricks an subterfuge policy makers have been able to kick the can down the road; they've been doing so in California for decades.

Gov. Brown said "Enough"; time will tell if he can bring order to chaos. As I watch the process I suspect Gov. Brown will cut, cut and cut some more, allowing the Republcan Party to achieve its goal to shrink government to the size it can be drowned in a bathtup.

In effect Brown maybe taking an ends and means strategy, for reason has not prevailed. No Republican is willing to compromse on new taxes, and too few are willing to allow an extension of others. While President Obama seeks to achieve compromise with the Republcans, Brown seems willing to allow Republicans to be responsible for the result. I suspect Brown is betting the people will reject the world as imagined by Grover Norquist, and reject the current members of the legislature for their refusal to allow the tax issues to be decided by the voter. If the California election of 2010 was a foreshadowing for 2012, the next tsunami will damage the GOP as badly as Watergate.

 

[Skynet]

Single-Payer in California? | Truthout

As long as it is done at the state level and not the federal level like obamacare I take no issue.

the fed has no constitional authority to be involved in health care.

You pay to support romneycare now and you will pay to support calicare.

Romenycare is supported by medicaid (but only 20%), which the government program for the poor. which coincidentally was already helping pay for the uninsured.

since i already am taxed to support medicaid it doesnt make any difference to me. my taxes havent increased for a service i am not using.

 

[American Cowboy]

Fvck, I am taxed enough already and on the verge of going back to Texas. Businesses, upper-class and middle upper-class are fleeing the state already. Wait till they see what happens is single payer goes through.

 

[Skynet]

this is the main failure of Romney care:

It’s important to note that the subsidies in Massachusetts are extensive and reach well into the middle class-available on a sliding scale to those with incomes up to 300 percent of the federal poverty level. That means subsidies would be available for those with incomes ranging from $30,480 for a single individual to as much as $130,389 for a married couple with seven children. A typical married couple with two children would qualify for a subsidy if their income were below $63,000.

and this

According to insurance industry insiders, the plans are too costly for the target market, and the potential customers- largely younger, healthy men-have resisted buying them. Those who have signed up have been disproportionately older and less healthy. This should come as no surprise since Massachusetts maintains a modified form of community rating, which forces younger and healthier individuals to pay higher premiums in order to subsidize premiums for the old and sick.

between half and two-thirds of those uninsured before the plan was implemented remain so. That’s a far cry from universal coverage. In fact, whatever progress has been made toward reducing the ranks of the uninsured appears to be almost solely the result of the subsidies. The much ballyhooed mandate itself appears to have had almost no impact.


people still werent paying into the system.