Is it time for Universal Healthcare....and can it be done?

[Thinker101]

First off, for those that know me...I am a conservative.
I do ask the question in sincerity.
Last year with health premiums, and healthcare bills, my wife and I spent $7,040 for the two of us.
Then add in the employers portion of premium and that totals up to roughly $11,000.
Even with that, we are well below the average cost the average American pays.
So, would I pay out say... $600 a month in taxes, and my employer in lieu of paying premiums, pay another $400 a month? Instead of paying an insurer?
Yes, yes I would.
But only if the care was equally as good.
And would it be?
How would we, as a nation, pay for the bums and lazy asses who won't work?
Should a "health tax" be income specific? So someone who makes $250,000 a year would pay a great deal more than a $50,000 a year person? Would that work?

One thing is for certain. The current system is not working well. We are paying more and more and more to insurers who are raising deductibles and increasing premiums while covering less.
What fix is there?

I just love you guys. You don't say IF it should be done, but WHEN it should be done.

You kids are the same ones that convinced us all that Obamacare was the cure to all our ills, but the ink is not even dry on the legislation and now you say that the current system is a failure.

No doubt, people will continue to listen to the same voices that sold us Obamacare which will sell us universal coverage.

Shrug, people are stupid.

Even with all the GOP and crony insurers sabotage of it, Obamacare still is working to cut cost Rises and is very popular except for Dukes and red States...

I see another idiot pops into the thread about Venezuela when the OP was nothing about Venezuela.

Venezuela is how you know a right winger is losing an argument.

It seems not so long ago that very country was being praised by people just like you. Now that it failed,
those same people run off and say silly things like, "Venezuela is how you know a right winger is losing an argument."

No one ever praised Venezuela LOL

Yeah, you never praised Venezuela, just their policies.

Before the oil price crashed in 2008 Hugo cut homelessness poverty in half and gave them Healthcare daycare and almost 100% literacy. And it was still capitalist... It is a third world country that has some oil very corrupt always was still is. Of course you are brainwashed about evil of it..
Still capitalist still democratic.

Great, Venezuela is calling to you.

 

[francoHFW]

First off, for those that know me...I am a conservative.
I do ask the question in sincerity.
Last year with health premiums, and healthcare bills, my wife and I spent $7,040 for the two of us.
Then add in the employers portion of premium and that totals up to roughly $11,000.
Even with that, we are well below the average cost the average American pays.
So, would I pay out say... $600 a month in taxes, and my employer in lieu of paying premiums, pay another $400 a month? Instead of paying an insurer?
Yes, yes I would.
But only if the care was equally as good.
And would it be?
How would we, as a nation, pay for the bums and lazy asses who won't work?
Should a "health tax" be income specific? So someone who makes $250,000 a year would pay a great deal more than a $50,000 a year person? Would that work?

One thing is for certain. The current system is not working well. We are paying more and more and more to insurers who are raising deductibles and increasing premiums while covering less.
What fix is there?

I just love you guys. You don't say IF it should be done, but WHEN it should be done.

You kids are the same ones that convinced us all that Obamacare was the cure to all our ills, but the ink is not even dry on the legislation and now you say that the current system is a failure.

No doubt, people will continue to listen to the same voices that sold us Obamacare which will sell us universal coverage.

Shrug, people are stupid.

Even with all the GOP and crony insurers sabotage of it, Obamacare still is working to cut cost Rises and is very popular except for Dukes and red States...

Venezuela is how you know a right winger is losing an argument.

It seems not so long ago that very country was being praised by people just like you. Now that it failed,
those same people run off and say silly things like, "Venezuela is how you know a right winger is losing an argument."

No one ever praised Venezuela LOL

Yeah, you never praised Venezuela, just their policies.

Before the oil price crashed in 2008 Hugo cut homelessness poverty in half and gave them Healthcare daycare and almost 100% literacy. And it was still capitalist... It is a third world country that has some oil very corrupt always was still is. Of course you are brainwashed about evil of it..
Still capitalist still democratic.

Great, Venezuela is calling to you.

God what an idiot I'm not going anywhere God damn fools....

 

[dogbone7.3]

Anyone that thinks universal healthcare is the answer, why not try the VA system. Ask a few vets how it works.
If you have half a brain, you’ll be changing your mind.
—-Or; talk to some Canadians. The truth about their system is worse than our VA system.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Meister]

Unfortunately, the socialist concept of universal health care adheres to the "from each, to each" concept. You say you and you wife have paid so much into the system? Obviously you are a "from-er". In reality, you are already footing the bill for many "to-ers".

I would sincerely like to offer you a one way all expense paid airline ticket to Venezuela, I say this with all sincerity.

I see another idiot pops into the thread about Venezuela when the OP was nothing about Venezuela.

Venezuela is how you know a right winger is losing an argument.

It seems not so long ago that very country was being praised by people just like you. Now that it failed,
those same people run off and say silly things like, "Venezuela is how you know a right winger is losing an argument."

No one ever praised Venezuela LOL

The likes of Sean Penn never praised the country? LOL You are a fool, Francis.

 

[iamwhatiseem]

I would sincerely like to offer you a one way all expense paid airline ticket to Venezuela, I say this with all sincerity.

I see another idiot pops into the thread about Venezuela when the OP was nothing about Venezuela.

Venezuela is how you know a right winger is losing an argument.

It seems not so long ago that very country was being praised by people just like you. Now that it failed,
those same people run off and say silly things like, "Venezuela is how you know a right winger is losing an argument."

No one ever praised Venezuela LOL

The likes of Sean Penn never praised the country? LOL You are a fool, Francis.

Michael Moore, Danny Glover....

 

[dblack]

Given that politics in the US has become so divisive, corrosive, and just plain stupid - it astounds me that anyone would think that making health care a matter of politics is a good idea. WTF?? Do any of you read the news?

 

[Redfish]

You can't be a conservative.
A conservative would know that government health care isn't cheap or free from abuse.

Government health care is the lowest quality health care in America.

You would also know that anything the government touches is highly regulated, overpriced, and there's usually a line of people in front of you that didn't pay into it.

Then what is the answer?
At the rate we are going, healthcare cost will become a full third of the GDP and your insurance cost will be the largest monthly bill you have.'
That is where we are now.
And that is not the answer either.

do you think the cost of healthcare will go down when you make it an entitlement and let the government run it? Taxes would skyrocket and the economy would tank. The government does not owe you free medical care any more than the government owes you a house, a car, or a filet mignon.

NOt sure why everyone keeps saying "free"??
I have clearly never said it would be free. Rather taking the insurance cost we all pay, and moving it into another system.

BUT - The biggest thing I want is A SOLUTION.
Like I said, going like we are, healthcare will be a 1/3rd of the GDP in the not so distant future. And it will become the single largest monthly bill you will pay.
This is going to happen if nothing is done.

One idea is a FAT TAX, as I said before, 67% of all healthcare dollars spent in America is to treat a diet-related illness.
Diabetes used to be fairly rare. It isn't anymore.
Heart Disease has steadily climbed every decade... overwhelmingly due to a horrific American diet.
Show I have to pay as much as 50% higher heailtcare rates because YOU can't stop going to ******* McDonalds everyday? And drink 6 cans of soda??
Why not a FAT TAX? ("Tax" being weight/height ratio and body fat % directly effecting your monthly insurance cost)
Not a tax collected, but higher premiums.

the VA is government managed healthcare, need I say more?

more taxes is always the answer, right? How about this, pay your own way. Take responsibility for your life.

your fat tax idea would have the libs screaming discrimination before it ever got anywhere near happening.

Well....libs scream all the time...so...
And again, not really a tax but rather higher premiums.
Think of tobacco penalties.... our plan cost $45 more a month if you smoke or chew.
Why not charge $100 more a month if you are above a % of overweight?

it would never work, they would say its genetic and they cant help it, they would claim discrimination against the obese, they would call you a skinny snob. I agree in principle, but its like charging more for people with pre-existing conditions.

There was nothing wrong with pre-obozocare medicine, insurance was reasonable and most employers shared in the cost, no one was turned away from a hospital. Those of us who paid covered those who didn't or couldn't, It worked.

the lib idea of universal "free" healthcare is what destroyed it. that and the greed of big pharma.

 

[iamwhatiseem]

it would never work, they would say its genetic and they cant help it, they would claim discrimination against the obese, they would call you a skinny snob. I agree in principle, but its like charging more for people with pre-existing conditions.

There was nothing wrong with pre-obozocare medicine, insurance was reasonable and most employers shared in the cost, no one was turned away from a hospital. Those of us who paid covered those who didn't or couldn't, It worked.

the lib idea of universal "free" healthcare is what destroyed it. that and the greed of big pharma.

Of that, I have no argument.
I am 53, all during the late 80's through to early-early 2000's... everything was fine.
My family plan I had for years was 80/20, $500 deductible...cost about $400/mo.
By 2008 it was more like $550/mo... still 80/20, but only if you went to certain doctors but the deductible by then was $2000.
After Obamacare, I lost my health insurance. Our company is less than 25 employees, so the owner was not required to carry insurance...by then cost was over $600/mo, 80/20 with a $3000 deductible.
I had to get Obamacare in 2016, I was paying $620/mo for SINGLE care, NO dental or eye...with a criminally high deductible of $6500. So basically I had no health insurance, I was making a donation.
Thank God the wife in 2017 was able to cover me under her plan.

 

[task0778]

I think we also need to consider how many people would be added into the health care system in this country that aren't there now that we would have to provide care for. The numbers are somewhat inaccurate, ranging somewhere around 30 million who are uninsured these days, but how many more people are there that have insurance but can't afford to use it? So if you adopt UHC, you're added tens of millions of people into the HC system but not increasing the number of providers and facilities, right? People ***** about access now, what's it going to be like with the many more people looking for treatment or care? I wonder how accurate those cost figures are for UHC, just sayin'.

Adding to the problem is that in many of the plans for switching to UHC is the idea that to help keep the costs down for UHC the gov't would reduce significantly the payments to providers and facilities. Which means more of them will go private. So make that illegal you say? Uh, is that even constitutional? I don't think so, and if it was then how many people will opt out of the medical profession early, or not enter into it in the 1st place? I can't see UHC working in the long term, not in this country. Wonder how things are working out in those wonderful, socialistic democracies that also have loads of refugees from Africa and the ME. Right now we got how many illegals in this country and more on the way? I assume we can't deny them treatment, right? The same people that want UHC also want open borders and no ICE, right? Isn't that adding to the cost problem?

 

[Redfish]

I think we also need to consider how many people would be added into the health care system in this country that aren't there now that we would have to provide care for. The numbers are somewhat inaccurate, ranging somewhere around 30 million who are uninsured these days, but how many more people are there that have insurance but can't afford to use it? So if you adopt UHC, you're added tens of millions of people into the HC system but not increasing the number of providers and facilities, right? People ***** about access now, what's it going to be like with the many more people looking for treatment or care? I wonder how accurate those cost figures are for UHC, just sayin'.

Adding to the problem is that in many of the plans for switching to UHC is the idea that to help keep the costs down for UHC the gov't would reduce significantly the payments to providers and facilities. Which means more of them will go private. So make that illegal you say? Uh, is that even constitutional? I don't think so, and if it was then how many people will opt out of the medical profession early, or not enter into it in the 1st place? I can't see UHC working in the long term, not in this country. Wonder how things are working out in those wonderful, socialistic democracies that also have loads of refugees from Africa and the ME. Right now we got how many illegals in this country and more on the way? I assume we can't deny them treatment, right? The same people that want UHC also want open borders and no ICE, right? Isn't that adding to the cost problem?

the simple answer is to get the government out of it and let the free market set the price of insurance, drug prices, and medical practices. The patent length for new drugs needs to be drastically reduced in order to get generics into the market faster. The games played by big pharma of making a slight insignificant change to a drug and getting a new patent must be stopped. Limits on malpractice judgements would also reduce the cost of medical care since providers would not have to pay huge malpractice insurance premiums.

Some common sense changes could result in significant cost reductions without any reduction in quality or availability.

 

[task0778]

I think we also need to consider how many people would be added into the health care system in this country that aren't there now that we would have to provide care for. The numbers are somewhat inaccurate, ranging somewhere around 30 million who are uninsured these days, but how many more people are there that have insurance but can't afford to use it? So if you adopt UHC, you're added tens of millions of people into the HC system but not increasing the number of providers and facilities, right? People ***** about access now, what's it going to be like with the many more people looking for treatment or care? I wonder how accurate those cost figures are for UHC, just sayin'.

Adding to the problem is that in many of the plans for switching to UHC is the idea that to help keep the costs down for UHC the gov't would reduce significantly the payments to providers and facilities. Which means more of them will go private. So make that illegal you say? Uh, is that even constitutional? I don't think so, and if it was then how many people will opt out of the medical profession early, or not enter into it in the 1st place? I can't see UHC working in the long term, not in this country. Wonder how things are working out in those wonderful, socialistic democracies that also have loads of refugees from Africa and the ME. Right now we got how many illegals in this country and more on the way? I assume we can't deny them treatment, right? The same people that want UHC also want open borders and no ICE, right? Isn't that adding to the cost problem?

the simple answer is to get the government out of it and let the free market set the price of insurance, drug prices, and medical practices. The patent length for new drugs needs to be drastically reduced in order to get generics into the market faster. The games played by big pharma of making a slight insignificant change to a drug and getting a new patent must be stopped. Limits on malpractice judgements would also reduce the cost of medical care since providers would not have to pay huge malpractice insurance premiums.

Some common sense changes could result in significant cost reductions without any reduction in quality or availability.

Ok, but consider this: if you drastically reduce the patent length for new drugs or protocols then the companies that create those things will include that consideration into their decisions for which drugs an practices to pursue and which ones to drop or ignore. Because, as you know it's about costs vs revenue and if you cut the patent length then the companies will cut costs somewhere to make up for less revenue. Which could mean that a life-saving drug or protocol never sees the light of day because the R&D costs exceeded the expected revenue.

Re a slight insignificant change to get a new patent, fine. Depends on how insignificant though. I dunno about limiting malpractice judgments, a bad doctor oughta get hammered six ways from Sunday for costing somebody his/her life or drastically impacting their way of life for as long as they live. Do we not have appeals courts and procedures in place to review outrageous malpractice judgments?

 

[Redfish]

I think we also need to consider how many people would be added into the health care system in this country that aren't there now that we would have to provide care for. The numbers are somewhat inaccurate, ranging somewhere around 30 million who are uninsured these days, but how many more people are there that have insurance but can't afford to use it? So if you adopt UHC, you're added tens of millions of people into the HC system but not increasing the number of providers and facilities, right? People ***** about access now, what's it going to be like with the many more people looking for treatment or care? I wonder how accurate those cost figures are for UHC, just sayin'.

Adding to the problem is that in many of the plans for switching to UHC is the idea that to help keep the costs down for UHC the gov't would reduce significantly the payments to providers and facilities. Which means more of them will go private. So make that illegal you say? Uh, is that even constitutional? I don't think so, and if it was then how many people will opt out of the medical profession early, or not enter into it in the 1st place? I can't see UHC working in the long term, not in this country. Wonder how things are working out in those wonderful, socialistic democracies that also have loads of refugees from Africa and the ME. Right now we got how many illegals in this country and more on the way? I assume we can't deny them treatment, right? The same people that want UHC also want open borders and no ICE, right? Isn't that adding to the cost problem?

the simple answer is to get the government out of it and let the free market set the price of insurance, drug prices, and medical practices. The patent length for new drugs needs to be drastically reduced in order to get generics into the market faster. The games played by big pharma of making a slight insignificant change to a drug and getting a new patent must be stopped. Limits on malpractice judgements would also reduce the cost of medical care since providers would not have to pay huge malpractice insurance premiums.

Some common sense changes could result in significant cost reductions without any reduction in quality or availability.

Ok, but consider this: if you drastically reduce the patent length for new drugs or protocols then the companies that create those things will include that consideration into their decisions for which drugs an practices to pursue and which ones to drop or ignore. Because, as you know it's about costs vs revenue and if you cut the patent length then the companies will cut costs somewhere to make up for less revenue. Which could mean that a life-saving drug or protocol never sees the light of day because the R&D costs exceeded the expected revenue.

Re a slight insignificant change to get a new patent, fine. Depends on how insignificant though. I dunno about limiting malpractice judgments, a bad doctor oughta get hammered six ways from Sunday for costing somebody his/her life or drastically impacting their way of life for as long as they live. Do we not have appeals courts and procedures in place to review outrageous malpractice judgments?

I guess we are just not on the same page, but that's OK.

 

[francoHFW]

Then what is the answer?
At the rate we are going, healthcare cost will become a full third of the GDP and your insurance cost will be the largest monthly bill you have.'
That is where we are now.
And that is not the answer either.

do you think the cost of healthcare will go down when you make it an entitlement and let the government run it? Taxes would skyrocket and the economy would tank. The government does not owe you free medical care any more than the government owes you a house, a car, or a filet mignon.

NOt sure why everyone keeps saying "free"??
I have clearly never said it would be free. Rather taking the insurance cost we all pay, and moving it into another system.

BUT - The biggest thing I want is A SOLUTION.
Like I said, going like we are, healthcare will be a 1/3rd of the GDP in the not so distant future. And it will become the single largest monthly bill you will pay.
This is going to happen if nothing is done.

One idea is a FAT TAX, as I said before, 67% of all healthcare dollars spent in America is to treat a diet-related illness.
Diabetes used to be fairly rare. It isn't anymore.
Heart Disease has steadily climbed every decade... overwhelmingly due to a horrific American diet.
Show I have to pay as much as 50% higher heailtcare rates because YOU can't stop going to ******* McDonalds everyday? And drink 6 cans of soda??
Why not a FAT TAX? ("Tax" being weight/height ratio and body fat % directly effecting your monthly insurance cost)
Not a tax collected, but higher premiums.

the VA is government managed healthcare, need I say more?

more taxes is always the answer, right? How about this, pay your own way. Take responsibility for your life.

your fat tax idea would have the libs screaming discrimination before it ever got anywhere near happening.

Well....libs scream all the time...so...
And again, not really a tax but rather higher premiums.
Think of tobacco penalties.... our plan cost $45 more a month if you smoke or chew.
Why not charge $100 more a month if you are above a % of overweight?

it would never work, they would say its genetic and they cant help it, they would claim discrimination against the obese, they would call you a skinny snob. I agree in principle, but its like charging more for people with pre-existing conditions.

There was nothing wrong with pre-obozocare medicine, insurance was reasonable and most employers shared in the cost, no one was turned away from a hospital. Those of us who paid covered those who didn't or couldn't, It worked.

the lib idea of universal "free" healthcare is what destroyed it. that and the greed of big pharma.

ObamaCare goes on and it still working despite endless sabotage by the GOP and their Pals in big health....

 

[dblack]

francoHFW - do you believe Donald Trump will make better decisions for your family's health care than you could?

 

[francoHFW]

do you think the cost of healthcare will go down when you make it an entitlement and let the government run it? Taxes would skyrocket and the economy would tank. The government does not owe you free medical care any more than the government owes you a house, a car, or a filet mignon.

NOt sure why everyone keeps saying "free"??
I have clearly never said it would be free. Rather taking the insurance cost we all pay, and moving it into another system.

BUT - The biggest thing I want is A SOLUTION.
Like I said, going like we are, healthcare will be a 1/3rd of the GDP in the not so distant future. And it will become the single largest monthly bill you will pay.
This is going to happen if nothing is done.

One idea is a FAT TAX, as I said before, 67% of all healthcare dollars spent in America is to treat a diet-related illness.
Diabetes used to be fairly rare. It isn't anymore.
Heart Disease has steadily climbed every decade... overwhelmingly due to a horrific American diet.
Show I have to pay as much as 50% higher heailtcare rates because YOU can't stop going to ******* McDonalds everyday? And drink 6 cans of soda??
Why not a FAT TAX? ("Tax" being weight/height ratio and body fat % directly effecting your monthly insurance cost)
Not a tax collected, but higher premiums.

the VA is government managed healthcare, need I say more?

more taxes is always the answer, right? How about this, pay your own way. Take responsibility for your life.

your fat tax idea would have the libs screaming discrimination before it ever got anywhere near happening.

Well....libs scream all the time...so...
And again, not really a tax but rather higher premiums.
Think of tobacco penalties.... our plan cost $45 more a month if you smoke or chew.
Why not charge $100 more a month if you are above a % of overweight?

it would never work, they would say its genetic and they cant help it, they would claim discrimination against the obese, they would call you a skinny snob. I agree in principle, but its like charging more for people with pre-existing conditions.

There was nothing wrong with pre-obozocare medicine, insurance was reasonable and most employers shared in the cost, no one was turned away from a hospital. Those of us who paid covered those who didn't or couldn't, It worked.

the lib idea of universal "free" healthcare is what destroyed it. that and the greed of big pharma.

ObamaCare goes on and it still working despite endless sabotage by the GOP and their Pals in big health....

The hell it work ed. 40000 dead a year, there were 750,000 bankruptcies based on Healthcare a year and 500000 of those thought they had good insurance LOL what a scam. The entire system was going toward big deduction catastrophic care. Now care is guaranteed in blue States and some red, the cost curve rise continues to bend down, and Medicaid gives the poor insurance preventive care with a doctor. It ain't perfect but we're lucky to have a system at all with GOP perfect obstruction and their silly chumps brainwashed by fox Rush heritage Alex Jones and God knows what...

 

[dblack]

francoHFW - do you believe Donald Trump will make better decisions for your family's health care than you could?

It's not a joke, francoHFW. If we get 'univesal healthcare', that means government controls your health care. And, sometimes, assholes will be elected to government. Do you really want assholes to control your healthcare?

 

[francoHFW]

francoHFW - do you believe Donald Trump will make better decisions for your family's health care than you could?

The GOP is owned lock stock and Barrel by corrupt big health big Pharma the NRA the propaganda machine etc etc...

 

[dblack]

francoHFW - do you believe Donald Trump will make better decisions for your family's health care than you could?

The GOP is owned lock stock and Barrel by corrupt big health big Pharma the NRA the propaganda machine etc etc...

Exactly. So how will universal health care fair when Republicans are running things? Did you guys think this through at all?

 

[francoHFW]

francoHFW - do you believe Donald Trump will make better decisions for your family's health care than you could?

It's not a joke, francoHFW. If we get 'univesal healthcare', that means government controls your health care. And, sometimes, assholes will be elected to government. Do you really want assholes to control your healthcare?

Why do idiots keep voting for GOP assholes LOL!? Better than big health big Pharma...

 

[dblack]

francoHFW - do you believe Donald Trump will make better decisions for your family's health care than you could?

It's not a joke, francoHFW. If we get 'univesal healthcare', that means government controls your health care. And, sometimes, assholes will be elected to government. Do you really want assholes to control your healthcare?

Why do idiots keep voting for GOP assholes LOL!? Better than big health big Pharma...

I've never voted Republican. Try again, hater-dupe!

Seriously, do you want every election to be referendum on health care? Every vote to be a life-or-death decision???