Bernie Sanders: We Will Raise Taxes On Anyone Making Over $29,000 To Fund Government Health Care

[22lcidw]

Like the millions of illegals who get healthcare in America? They’re all RICH!

They do not get healthcare. I do not know why you want to continue with something you know is false. They can access emergency care.

Illegals don’t get healthcare in America?

Youre a friggen troll

The ER is not at all sufficient health care.
It is just for stitches, setting fractures, etc.

From personal experience, I've found it's a lot more. The ER is often the fastest and surest way to get a diagnosis. Of course a lot depends on your health history and age.

Get an appointment with your GP and you get some pills, maybe a few tests and suggestions and if the pain isn't better in two weeks you come back. He goes over test results and if the pain is still there you see a specialist in a few weeks. The specialist then orders more blood tests an EKG, and an MRI which takes about two weeks more to get all the appointments and results back to your doctor. Hopefully then you will get a diagnosis and treatment plan.

In the ER, the blood tests, EKG, and MRI are all ordered and results are back in a few hours. Your attending physician discusses your case with a specialist and you have a diagnosis. A tentative treatment plan is created and you are sent home with medication or to the hospital. What took 6 weeks out of the ER is often accomplished in a few hour in the ER.

This is one of the reason we over utilize the ER.

We over utilize the E.R. because that is the only way thousands of people can afford treatment. That is, they don't have to pay up front. When all of these people get treated at an E.R. they do not pay the bill. Those with insurance pay their bill.

Why would you be against a system that would make them contribute to the system?

I've asked this 4-5 times now and no one answered.

Because most of them do not or have never contributed to the system anyway. There is your answer. You are taxing the sucker who is above the poverty line and is not in a privileged job.

 

[pknopp]

They do not get healthcare. I do not know why you want to continue with something you know is false. They can access emergency care.

Illegals don’t get healthcare in America?

Youre a friggen troll

The ER is not at all sufficient health care.
It is just for stitches, setting fractures, etc.

From personal experience, I've found it's a lot more. The ER is often the fastest and surest way to get a diagnosis. Of course a lot depends on your health history and age.

Get an appointment with your GP and you get some pills, maybe a few tests and suggestions and if the pain isn't better in two weeks you come back. He goes over test results and if the pain is still there you see a specialist in a few weeks. The specialist then orders more blood tests an EKG, and an MRI which takes about two weeks more to get all the appointments and results back to your doctor. Hopefully then you will get a diagnosis and treatment plan.

In the ER, the blood tests, EKG, and MRI are all ordered and results are back in a few hours. Your attending physician discusses your case with a specialist and you have a diagnosis. A tentative treatment plan is created and you are sent home with medication or to the hospital. What took 6 weeks out of the ER is often accomplished in a few hour in the ER.

This is one of the reason we over utilize the ER.

We over utilize the E.R. because that is the only way thousands of people can afford treatment. That is, they don't have to pay up front. When all of these people get treated at an E.R. they do not pay the bill. Those with insurance pay their bill.

Why would you be against a system that would make them contribute to the system?

I've asked this 4-5 times now and no one answered.

Because most of them do not or have never contributed to the system anyway. There is your answer. You are taxing the sucker who is above the poverty line and is not in a privileged job.

The majority making below $24k will move up. That's the way it works. Then again I will note, you are paying for the poor anyway. They qualify for Medicaid. They can get treatment with Medicaid. There will always be those and you are always going to pay but under reform, many more will be contributing to that.

How is this a bad thing?

 

[sparky]

Illegals don’t get healthcare in America?

Youre a friggen troll

The ER is not at all sufficient health care.
It is just for stitches, setting fractures, etc.

From personal experience, I've found it's lot more. The ER is often the fastest and surest way to get a diagnosis. Go to you your GP and you get some pills, maybe a few tests and suggestions and if the pain isn't better in two weeks you come back. He goes over test results and if the pain is still there you see a specialist in few weeks. The specialist then orders more blood tests an EKG, and an MRI which takes about two weeks get appointments and results back to your doctor. Hopefully then you will get a diagnosis and treatment plan.

In the ER, the blood tests, EKG, and MRI are all ordered and results are back in a few hours. Your attending physician discusses your case with a specialist and you have diagnosis. A treatment plan is created and you are sent home with medication or to the hospital. What took 6 weeks out of the ER is accomplished in few hour in the ER.

This is one of the reason we over utilize the ER.

My experience is that the ER will not perform tests like that, and will still just refer to you a specialist.
The ER staff does not have the training or the time.
But I suppose it would depend on things like the size of the hospital?

Actually they do, because they face the same liability as your family doctor. They make sure all their bases are covered in the event of a lawsuit.

My grandson broke his collarbone the other day. The E.R. diagnosed the break and gave them a cheap sling BUT then they had to go to a specialist. One that will ask for your method of payment up front.

Most general practitioners assume a career being little more than gate keepers for the insurance cabal. Dig enough, and you'll find they own most HC facilities ....dig further & you'll find we've a pandemic of ER closures coast to coast, juxtaposed to 'urgent care' facility openings.

This is not by chance

because one in held to JACHO, and one is not

It literally threw the hippocratic oath into the corporate ethical matrix

~S~

 

[flack]

I see no one demanding higher taxes to pay down the 23 Trillion.

I am. Have been for years. I think taxes should automatically go up (across the board, not the usual "targeted" bullshit - the increase needs to hit everyone) until we reach a balanced budget. It's the only way we'll get a true read on how much government people actually want. As it is, with no one paying for it, people will vote for every "free shit" program that is proposed.

I have better idea.

Why don't we for the time being keep the taxes where they are and cut back on spending? The money we cut back on we could use to pay the debt.

We could easily cut back a couple of trillion a year on Federal spending and still spend more money on the cost of government than almost any other country on earth.

When everything is paid off then we can reduce taxes by the amount we had been spending on the debt. Win win for everybody except the filthy welfare queens that suck on the teat of big government.

I pretty much agree except that there really is no federal welfare to speak of.
There is ADC, but no one can really live on that, and that is for the children, not adults.
It is military spending we need to cut back by trillions.

Trillion? The federal government spent $4.1 trillion in 2018. 60% went to social programs. 10% went to payments on the interest to the debt. 30% went to pay for the government itself including the military which was the largest part. Just where are those trillions?

On March 16, 2017 President Trump submitted his request to Congress for $639 billion in military spending—$54 billion—which represents a 10 percent increase—for FY 2018 as well as $30 billion for FY2017 which ends in September.

 

[flack]

We are 23 Trillion in debt. When do we hit bankruptcy? If we do not have to pay for bombs and bailouts, why do we have to pay for healthcare?

Almost all of the national debt is defense spending.
Most of our annual budget is defense once you include things like VA and GIBill costs.
The national debt still includes SDI, Desert Storm, the invasion of Iraq, etc.
There is essentially no social services in the national debt.
There will be some when SS temporarily short falls by 10% or so, but nothing significant yet.

Almost all of the national debt is defense spending.

You misspelled "entitlement spending".

That is not at all true.
First of all, you can not include self funding programs like Social Security of Medicare.
Second is that not only is about 50% of the rest of the national budget for defense, but all of the interest on past debt is also defense. So the real total for defense spending is more like 75% of the discretionary budget.

You are full of it.

Federal Spending Breakdown
Almost two-thirds of federal spending goes toward paying the benefits required by Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid. These are part of mandatory spending. Those are programs established by prior Acts of Congress.


The interest payments on the national debt consume 10% of the budget. These are also required to maintain faith in the U.S. government.


The remaining 30% of spending goes toward discretionary spending. This pays for all federal government agencies. The largest is the military.

WRONG!
NO federal spending goes toward paying the benefits required by Social Security, Medicare, or Medicaid.
They are all pretty much self funding currently, through FICA.
They are not currently part of the federal budget at all.
Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid is our own money being given back to us.
Over the last century, FICA has been running a surplus, which has been used to pay the national debt.
It is only in the next 10 years or so that Social Security will start to run a slight deficit and need federal funding.

Military spending has always been more than half the federal budget.

Learn something for once. Look at the red line in the lower right of the clock.

https://www.usdebtclock.org

 

[flack]

You were complaining that the government makes bad decisions. I was pointing out that private business does also.

Actually I'm actually saying the government ALWAYS makes bad decisions. And why wouldn't they when there's no accountability? When they **** up they can just dump it on the taxpayers.

When private industry ***** up, they either have to fix it or lose out to competition. So yeah, I have far more faith in private enterprise than a bunch of bureaucrats.

Private industry cry's to the government to bail them out and they do. I do not care that you say you do not support that, it's what happens.

Now again, try and end Medicare.

Then what the **** are you even arguing with me about?

I already gave you my response on Medicare - just because it's "liked" doesn't mean it's viable. I don't have to do jack shit, it will implode on it's own. As will Social Security. Mathematics are immutable.

No, social security and Medicare will only go through about a decade of shortfall, and then will be showing a surplus again.
There is nothing wrong with either of them, and they are both perfectly viable programs.
We Boomers skewed it slightly, but only for awhile.

That is absolutely false.

Try and wrap your mind around this - Medicare/social security/etc were based on the premise of shorter lifespans and an ever increasing workforce. However, lifespans have substantially increased and birth rates have substantially declined.

For the sake of simplified argument, assume the following: 3 generations starting in 1980, each with a lifespan of 80 years and a career life of 40 years (starting at age 20 and ending at 60).

In 1980 there are 100 couples. They each have 1 child. This is Gen1.
In 2000, their 50 children enter the workforce. They also couple up and produce 1 child. This is Gen2.
In 2020, their 25 children enter the workforce. This is Gen3.

Immediately when Gen3 enters the workforce, it is sharing the responsibility of Gen1 (who is now retired) with Gen2. 75 people who, on top of their own obligations, must support their original 100 progenitors. Already an issue. Then in 2040 Gen2 retires. Now Gen1 is responsible for ALL of their progenitors, Gen1 AND Gen2. 25 people who must support themselves, plus another 150.

This is what is happening now, and it is completely unsustainable as the government will be forced to take an ever increasing slice of an ever decreasing pie.

Put all the bureaucratic spin on it you want, the math doesn't lie. There will NEVER be a surplus. There WILL be a catastrophic failure.

The ONLY way you keep these programs solvent is to increase birth rates. And with the left's relentless war against children by promoting abortion, carefree single lifestyles, and "I am woman hear me roar" nonsense - this isn't going to happen. We're already well below replacement level and there are no indications that this is going to reverse.

View attachment 291998

56 million abortion is part of the problem. Plus those children had no chance to have children of their own.

 

[flack]

Medicare for All reminds me of the original Obamacare, "Health Care for America Plan" which contained a public option allowing people to transfer to a Medicare like system without age restriction. The public option was of course a major target of the insurance companies and was dropped almost immediately by congress.

I think there are some misconceptions about how the Medicare for All proposals would be implemented. Once congress gets hold of any of the current proposals, they would change radically.

• First, it would not be Medicare. It would be a healthcare plan similar to Medicare but would look more like an employer sponsored plan than Medicare.
• It would be phased in over many years opening up first to older Americans and gradually extended to all ages.
• Lastly, there would be supplemental insurance just as there is with Medicare.

Any national healthcare plan would be a series of compromises. We have to remember this is not 1965 when Medicare was passed where deals were made between democrats and republicans to pass major legislation and the influence of lobbyists was far less than today.

What would actually stand a chance at working is allow people with preexisting conditions to go on Medicare. That would remove all the high risk patients from private insurance, and that would cause a price decrease, or at the very least, a price freeze.

Next is Medicare and Medicaid needs to start paying the entire bill instead of only part of it.
In any case, nothing gets done the right way until we work on lowering the cost of medical care first. If we don't do that, we're just passing the buck around.

No, Medicare and Medicaid is paying the only valid portion of the bill.
What we have to do is stop the insurance companies from paying more of the bill than Medicare does.
The current bills are incredibly fake and inflated.
That is the whole problem of 3rd party payer, they LIKE inflated bills because then everyone absolutely needs to have insurance even more.
The whole problem is 3rd party payer, who does not care about quality or cost.
The patient can do nothing because they already prepaid.
It is like prepaid legal service, can not possibly ever work.

It's worked very well for generations. Handing it over to government is the stupidest thing we could possibly do. Government is a huge reason why our healthcare is so expensive to begin with.

For generations the cost to deliver a baby was around $100.

{...
The average total price charged for pregnancy and newborn care is about $30,000 for a vaginal delivery and $50,000 for a C-section, with insurers paying out an average of $18,329 and $27,866, according to a recent report by Truven Health Analytics.
...}

That is more than just inflation.

100 years ago the doctor came to the house, there was no nurse, and the woman delivered the baby in her bed. Maybe had a sister or mom or neighbor there to help.

Now you have all kind of machines, a couple of nurses doing various things, and and a whole office full of people to do the paperwork. That is expensive.

 

[pknopp]

What would actually stand a chance at working is allow people with preexisting conditions to go on Medicare. That would remove all the high risk patients from private insurance, and that would cause a price decrease, or at the very least, a price freeze.

Next is Medicare and Medicaid needs to start paying the entire bill instead of only part of it.
In any case, nothing gets done the right way until we work on lowering the cost of medical care first. If we don't do that, we're just passing the buck around.

No, Medicare and Medicaid is paying the only valid portion of the bill.
What we have to do is stop the insurance companies from paying more of the bill than Medicare does.
The current bills are incredibly fake and inflated.
That is the whole problem of 3rd party payer, they LIKE inflated bills because then everyone absolutely needs to have insurance even more.
The whole problem is 3rd party payer, who does not care about quality or cost.
The patient can do nothing because they already prepaid.
It is like prepaid legal service, can not possibly ever work.

It's worked very well for generations. Handing it over to government is the stupidest thing we could possibly do. Government is a huge reason why our healthcare is so expensive to begin with.

For generations the cost to deliver a baby was around $100.

{...
The average total price charged for pregnancy and newborn care is about $30,000 for a vaginal delivery and $50,000 for a C-section, with insurers paying out an average of $18,329 and $27,866, according to a recent report by Truven Health Analytics.
...}

That is more than just inflation.

100 years ago the doctor came to the house, there was no nurse, and the woman delivered the baby in her bed. Maybe had a sister or mom or neighbor there to help.

Now you have all kind of machines, a couple of nurses doing various things, and and a whole office full of people to do the paperwork. That is expensive.

I was not quoting what happened 100 years ago in the home. I am quoting actual hospital charges.

 

[flack]

Why should anyone have to pay more for universal health care when they are paying twice as much for private insurance now anyway?Universal health care does NOT cost more, but about half as much.

Because its a crisis. All you bleeding hearts who want universal healthcare send Sanders and Warren $10,000 right now, people are dying for Christ sake. Send it priority overnight, save lives.

Not a damn one of you will, that tells me all I need to know about the left.

The whole point is that health care is costing twice what it should.
Providing health care for the poor is irrelevant.
We do that now anyway, through free use of the ER for indigents.
That has nothing at all to do with why we need public health care.
The whole point of public health care is to bring down prices, not increase coverage.
The private health insurance companies are using unfair monopolies to extort huge excess sums from us, under threat of cutting us off from any health care access.

We? You own a hospital?

 

[flack]

No, Medicare and Medicaid is paying the only valid portion of the bill.
What we have to do is stop the insurance companies from paying more of the bill than Medicare does.
The current bills are incredibly fake and inflated.
That is the whole problem of 3rd party payer, they LIKE inflated bills because then everyone absolutely needs to have insurance even more.
The whole problem is 3rd party payer, who does not care about quality or cost.
The patient can do nothing because they already prepaid.
It is like prepaid legal service, can not possibly ever work.

It's worked very well for generations. Handing it over to government is the stupidest thing we could possibly do. Government is a huge reason why our healthcare is so expensive to begin with.

For generations the cost to deliver a baby was around $100.

{...
The average total price charged for pregnancy and newborn care is about $30,000 for a vaginal delivery and $50,000 for a C-section, with insurers paying out an average of $18,329 and $27,866, according to a recent report by Truven Health Analytics.
...}

That is more than just inflation.

100 years ago the doctor came to the house, there was no nurse, and the woman delivered the baby in her bed. Maybe had a sister or mom or neighbor there to help.

Now you have all kind of machines, a couple of nurses doing various things, and and a whole office full of people to do the paperwork. That is expensive.

I was not quoting what happened 100 years ago in the home. I am quoting actual hospital charges.

I was pointing out how medical care for pregnant women has changed.

 

[Flash]

What’s the world ranking of Cuban healthcare according to the list you use?

79. Higher than the United States.

Life Expectancy in United States

Thanks for making my point. Your rankings are BS, nobody goes to Cuba for healthcare.

BTW, 2 second search.

So These the "Bad Hombres" Trump Wants to Get Rid Of?

You can put the money in my PayPal.

Wrong!
Not only do thousands of people go to Cuba for health care each year, but teams of Cuban health providers are hired to come to other countries to deal with medical problems, like epidemics, etc.
Cuba has much better health care than the US in general. Just not some of the top, over paid, specialists.

Do you go to Cuba? No!

Can you name a single person who did? No!

Can you name a single American treated by one of these imaginary Cuban doctors? No!

I have never needed any significant medical treatment yet.
Just minor things like stitches.

But I know people who went to Cuba for cosmetic surgery, hip replacement, cancer treatment, etc.

All the Moon Bats should go to Cuba for medical treatment. According to Michael Moore they have the greatest medical care on the face of the earth.

 

[pknopp]

79. Higher than the United States.

Life Expectancy in United States

Thanks for making my point. Your rankings are BS, nobody goes to Cuba for healthcare.

BTW, 2 second search.

So These the "Bad Hombres" Trump Wants to Get Rid Of?

You can put the money in my PayPal.

Wrong!
Not only do thousands of people go to Cuba for health care each year, but teams of Cuban health providers are hired to come to other countries to deal with medical problems, like epidemics, etc.
Cuba has much better health care than the US in general. Just not some of the top, over paid, specialists.

Do you go to Cuba? No!

Can you name a single person who did? No!

Can you name a single American treated by one of these imaginary Cuban doctors? No!

I have never needed any significant medical treatment yet.
Just minor things like stitches.

But I know people who went to Cuba for cosmetic surgery, hip replacement, cancer treatment, etc.

All the Moon Bats should go to Cuba for medical treatment. According to Michael Moore they have the greatest medical care on the face of the earth.

How does on define great? Really good care for all or excellent care for those who can afford it?

 

[flack]

So DO IT send Bernie the money to put health insurance companies out of business DO IT TODAY! Here I'll just laugh at you now

I don't care, I will be voting for whatever Democrat they put up they all want the same thing. Help for the middle class and working class.... Worst inequality and upward mobility and 78% going paycheck to paycheck is not trivia, brainwashed functional moron

So you like people making $14/hr getting higher taxes on their paychecks.
Yep. You Leftards hate the poor.

And free healthcare. It's a great deal actually but you brainwashed functional morons are so fear mongered I think we have to go with the public option like Obama wanted. He also did not want to mandate. Scary how total garbage propaganda is so powerful....

And free healthcare! Just like Canada so we can wait 19 months for a pacemaker!

The life expectancy on average in Canada is 82.8.

In the U.S. it's 78.5.

Smaller population. Drugs and minorities not as prevalent has more to do with it than healthcare.

 

[flack]

So you like people making $14/hr getting higher taxes on their paychecks.
Yep. You Leftards hate the poor.

And free healthcare. It's a great deal actually but you brainwashed functional morons are so fear mongered I think we have to go with the public option like Obama wanted. He also did not want to mandate. Scary how total garbage propaganda is so powerful....

And free healthcare! Just like Canada so we can wait 19 months for a pacemaker!

The life expectancy on average in Canada is 82.8.

In the U.S. it's 78.5.

We have more minorities with more drugs and more violence.

I figured this would be the reply while missing the larger point. If things were so bad in Canada they would not have the 7th highest life expectancy rate.

Canada is about 25 times bigger than California.
California is approximately 403,882 sq km, while Canada is approximately 9,984,670 sq km. Meanwhile, the population of California is ~37.3 million people (1.6 million fewer people live in Canada).

 

[Flash]

[Q

We over utilize the E.R. because that is the only way thousands of people can afford treatment. That is, they don't have to pay up front. When all of these people get treated at an E.R. they do not pay the bill. Those with insurance pay their bill.

Why would you be against a system that would make them contribute to the system?

I've asked this 4-5 times now and no one answered.

The best system would be that the government stayed out of the health care business.

You pay for your health care and I pay for mine. That is the best way. Then I wouldn't have to worry about having my cost being jacked up because somebody else is getting it for free.

If I chose to join an insurance pool that meets my needs then it fine. The last thing I need is for the filthy government to regulate the insurance companies or the medical care industry. That ***** everything up. It really drives the cost up.

I have asked you several times what is wrong with that and you have yet to give an answer.

The answer is not more government interference or reshuffling the kind of interference. It is the government not doing any interference.

 

[pknopp]

I don't care, I will be voting for whatever Democrat they put up they all want the same thing. Help for the middle class and working class.... Worst inequality and upward mobility and 78% going paycheck to paycheck is not trivia, brainwashed functional moron

So you like people making $14/hr getting higher taxes on their paychecks.
Yep. You Leftards hate the poor.

And free healthcare. It's a great deal actually but you brainwashed functional morons are so fear mongered I think we have to go with the public option like Obama wanted. He also did not want to mandate. Scary how total garbage propaganda is so powerful....

And free healthcare! Just like Canada so we can wait 19 months for a pacemaker!

The life expectancy on average in Canada is 82.8.

In the U.S. it's 78.5.

Smaller population. Drugs and minorities not as prevalent has more to do with it than healthcare.

All of the top countries have universal care.

 

[pknopp]

And free healthcare. It's a great deal actually but you brainwashed functional morons are so fear mongered I think we have to go with the public option like Obama wanted. He also did not want to mandate. Scary how total garbage propaganda is so powerful....

And free healthcare! Just like Canada so we can wait 19 months for a pacemaker!

The life expectancy on average in Canada is 82.8.

In the U.S. it's 78.5.

We have more minorities with more drugs and more violence.

I figured this would be the reply while missing the larger point. If things were so bad in Canada they would not have the 7th highest life expectancy rate.

Canada is about 25 times bigger than California.
California is approximately 403,882 sq km, while Canada is approximately 9,984,670 sq km. Meanwhile, the population of California is ~37.3 million people (1.6 million fewer people live in Canada).

All the top countries have universal health care.

 

[pknopp]

[Q

We over utilize the E.R. because that is the only way thousands of people can afford treatment. That is, they don't have to pay up front. When all of these people get treated at an E.R. they do not pay the bill. Those with insurance pay their bill.

Why would you be against a system that would make them contribute to the system?

I've asked this 4-5 times now and no one answered.

The best system would be that the government stayed out of the health care business.

You pay for your health care and I pay for mine. That is the best way. Then I wouldn't have to worry about having my cost being jacked up because somebody else is getting it for free.

If I chose to join an insurance pool that meets my needs then it fine. The last thing I need is for the filthy government to regulate the insurance companies or the medical care industry. That ***** everything up. It really drives the cost up.

I have asked you several times what is wrong with that and you have yet to give an answer.

The answer is not more government interference or reshuffling the kind of interference. It is the government not doing any interference.

Impossible. Those who argue like you do argue for the impossible. You would have people dead in the street as many can not afford treatment. Even many who work can not afford treatment.

 

[flack]

Imagine if it were a real monopoly, if there was only one insurance company. And you couldn't even refuse to pay your "premiums", because it had merged with the government, and the premiums were your taxes. Wouldn't that be a nightmare scenario?

A monopoly does not imply there is just one insurance company.
What it means is that you are unable to negotiate fairly because there is a monolithic control working against you.
That can be price fixing by many companies, or a government mandate.
It just means something is monopolizing your choices.
For example, a mafia protection racket is a monopoly by the threat of force if you do not comply.

But the government is not a monopoly because you get to vote and the people collectively control it.
It works for you instead of trying to gain profit out of you.
And public health care in no country has at all precluded private insurance or health care.
It just provides a minimal safety net as competition, in order to break the health insurance monopoly.

Yes, yes. It's all fine and dandy because we get to vote! What, once every four years, cast a vote for a representative and hope he or she votes the way you want on legislation??

You know how many votes it takes to fire a private insurance company if I don't like the way they do things? Just one. Mine. And there are other insurance companies. Granted, they operate in a rigged game propped up by ill-conceived regulation, but the obvious answer to that problem is to remove the legislation propping them up. Not to pass more.

Actually the House is completely re-elected every 2 years. The Senate is elected for 6 years but 33% is elected every 2 years. The president, of course, is elected every 4 years.

 

[flack]

I disagree.
When medical providers are only paid a third of what they charge, they are not operating at a loss.
It is just that they have jacked up their bills by over 4 times what they should be.

The savings that would pay for medicare for all would be the billions currently wasted on filling out private insurance claims, prepaying premiums, tax exempt employer benefits, incredibly jacked up provider charges, profit skimming by insurance companies and medical corporation monopolies, etc.
Other countries prove health care costs can be cut in half and still provide better quality service.

Nobody has better healthcare than the US when it comes to quality.

I'm a patient at the world famous Cleveland Clinic. In fact, was just there yesterday to get checked out. When you go to their downtown campus, you are the one who feels like a foreigner.

It's not just patients, it's doctors as well. They either come here from their socialized medical care countries to make some real money, or come here, get educated, and never return home. So because of our system, we draw the best talent from around the world.

My sister works there as well. She can testify to the amount of Canadian patients at the Clinic looking for some relief that they couldn't get in their socialized medical care country. In fact, all our northern hospitals have Canadian patients.

So you can't tell me of another country that's problem-less either. They all have either extremely slow services, low quality equipment, medications we quit using decades ago, or outright refuse to treat some people. Nobody has a perfect medial system, including ours.

Not at all true.
The US is ranked something like 29th in health care.
Medical tourism FROM the US is 100 times higher than people coming to the US for medical care.
The only people coming to the US for medical care are the very wealthy who want elite care.
That is not what most people in the US get.
The US has over 100,000 a year dying from medical malpractice, and is one of the worst in the world for health care quality.
The fact we pay physicians more does not mean we get better quality health care.

The mortage defaults were never allowed to refinance.
The bubble busting made their home not worth enough for them to qualify.
They owed more than the home was worth.
But they still would have kept making their old payments because they would want to protect their down payment.
But they could not make the new ARM payments that as much as doubled.

There were no 1% interest mortgages.
They lowest mortgages during the bubble were around 8%, and the bust made them jump to over 15%.
The drop to 3% did not happen until years later, when there were so many foreclosures that banks had to eventually drop rates.

Almost no one took out real estate loans they could not afford.
They were making the payments successfully, and could have continued doing so.
It was their rates being jack up deceptively by ARM loans that forced them to default.
Do you think they just wanted to throw away their down payment and years of monthly payments?
They liked being make homeless?

Again, read about the LIBOR scandal.
Libor scandal - Wikipedia

But they could not make the new ARM payments that as much as doubled.

If you can only afford the teaser rate.....chances are you got a bad mortgage.

There were no 1% interest mortgages.

There were definitely mortgages with very low teaser rates as well as negative amortization mortgages.

They lowest mortgages during the bubble were around 8%,

If rates were 8% or higher, the bubble wouldn't have happened.

and the bust made them jump to over 15%.

You're lying.

It was their rates being jack up deceptively by ARM loans that forced them to default.

Deceptively? LOL!
When was the last time you took out a mortgage?
The pages and pages of rate disclosure documents are hard to miss.

Do you think they just wanted to throw away their down payment and years of monthly payments?

Many had very low or no down payment at all.

First of all, teaser rates most definitely ARE DECEPTIVE and not the fault of the borrower.
Second is that the loan paper work did NOT disclose that the loan was based on the British LIBOR instead of the US Prime, and that in a recession when the US Prime would go down, the LIBOR would greatly go UP!

The only reason we're ranked 29th is because not everybody has equal coverage.

According to the people who like the current system, less than 10% are without private coverage, and they get free ER care.
I think the reality is that more than 20% actually are without coverage, and the current system has very poor quality care.
I know people who went in for chest pains, were told it was indigestion, and they died a well later from a heart attack.
I know someone else who had a seizure, went in for MRI and xrays, were told nothing found, and a month later other doctors removed a golf ball sized tumor. But too late.
When I don't have insurance, no office will even take me, and I have to use ER or Urgent care.
ER wanted $2500 for a couple of stitches.

I have a lot of family that are healthcare providers and I have not seen or heard of most of the problems you listed.

My guess is that higher deductibles are keeping more people from going to the doctor with relatively minor problems because they are paying 100% of the cost while expanded Medicaid is encouraging people to seek medical help even for minor problems. For people with fairly serious problems such that they exceed their deductible or their yearly maximum, they are able to get the care they need without bankrupting the family, losing their home, etc.

One of the biggest problems is people going to the doctor for things they can treat themselves. Like colds or minor sprained ankles. Mommy running to the doctor because Little Johnny got a sniffle.