It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

EYE-OPENER..Universal HealthCare In America Would Be Surprisingly Inexpensive.!

page: 11
25
<< 8  9  10   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 18 2017 @ 11:02 PM
link   
May 18, 2017

This is an interesting Opinion column from the New York Times. The author lays out reasons why a beefed-up MEDICAID FOR ALL system would be perfect for America.

NYT Opinion: www.nytimes.com...

What do those of you who want Universal Healthcare, think of Michael Sparer's suggestion?




posted on Jul, 24 2017 @ 07:35 PM
link   

originally posted by: carewemust
May 18, 2017

This is an interesting Opinion column from the New York Times. The author lays out reasons why a beefed-up MEDICAID FOR ALL system would be perfect for America.

NYT Opinion: www.nytimes.com...

What do those of you who want Universal Healthcare, think of Michael Sparer's suggestion?


Some people may not want Medicaid, even though it's Free. For those with the lowest incomes, Medicaid should be automatic.

Medicare is available for those who can afford it. ($300 - $600 a month per person)

The private market should still be available for those who are healthy enough to qualify.



posted on Jul, 30 2017 @ 02:03 AM
link   
The push for MEDICARE FOR ALL is gaining steam. The USA Today lays out rational, logical (though with a few faults) case for this system working in America.

Excerpt:

""Paying for Medicare for All would require an increase in taxes — perhaps an earmarked progressive income tax for the purpose — but that increase would be offset by the elimination of premiums and out-of-pocket costs, and the slowing of inflation that stems from our market-based system.

As it now stands, 65% of health costs are already paid for by the federal government in one way or another. Health policy experts estimate this would increase to 80% with Medicare for All. Since employers would no longer have the expense of providing health insurance, they would be more competitive in global markets and would likely hire more workers.

We are now between a rock and a hard place. Obamacare is faltering, and the incoming Trump administration has no realistic alternative. Paradoxically, this might be exactly the right time to push for a national health program.""

Full Article: www.usatoday.com...



posted on Jul, 30 2017 @ 02:06 AM
link   
a reply to: carewemust


For the greatest country on the planet to NOT have health care available for each and every one of its citizens regardless of financial position just shows that it is not the greatest country on the planet.




posted on Jul, 30 2017 @ 02:14 AM
link   

originally posted by: hopenotfeariswhatweneed
a reply to: carewemust


For the greatest country on the planet to NOT have health care available for each and every one of its citizens regardless of financial position just shows that it is not the greatest country on the planet.



Good point! And "great healthcare for every citizen" is one of the things that President Trump says will make America much better.



posted on Jul, 31 2017 @ 09:32 AM
link   
a reply to: carewemust


...an increase in taxes OR a reduction of the obscene amounts of money spent on our War Machine & False Wars....

I would prefer the latter over the former.



posted on Jul, 31 2017 @ 09:43 AM
link   
a reply to: carewemust

Medicaid is not "free."

You lose the argument right there.

Nothing is "free" when it involves the provisions of good and services.

Do you think the medical providers who accept Medicaid patients are simply providing their care pro-bono? Uh, no. They are getting compensated, and if they are getting compensated for goods and services rendered, then Medicaid is not "free." Financing that comes from somewhere, so where? How is that money raised, and if everyone is getting their Medicaid "free" where are we actually paying for it from and how much now will it cost to have 350million of us on it instead of the ones on it now?



posted on Aug, 6 2017 @ 11:28 PM
link   
a reply to: ketsuko


Correct, Medicaid is not FREE, from a societal perspective. It's FREE, or very low cost, to the recipients.


I was just reading more information about Bernie Sander's Single-Payer plan. It would increase everyone's taxes by $4,000 @ year, but individuals, families, employers, would no longer have to pay health insurance premiums.

Source: fortune.com...

For most people who buy their own health insurance, they would SAVE MONEY with Bernie's single-payer plan.



posted on Aug, 7 2017 @ 02:42 AM
link   
First i do not want to pay for drug users care.
Also do not want anything to do with paying for criminal care.
Don't expect the public to pay for a criminals care when he is shot by another criminal.

DUI drivers should have to pay for both there and there victims care even if it take the rest of there life.

Medicare fraud cost the American taxpayer over $80 billion a year this has got to stop.



posted on Aug, 7 2017 @ 03:36 AM
link   
So if health care is free to use and paid by tax, everyone will be wanting to get their money's worth.

Hospitals will have even less incentive to cut costs.

I can see everyone making their monthly visit for the latest high tech toenail fungus remediation and whatnot.

Bump your head? MRI, followed by some sort of expensive treatment or uneccesary surgery.

We can all be the 6 million dollar man.



posted on Aug, 7 2017 @ 03:45 AM
link   
a reply to: ItsNotIronic

if you became a hypochondriac due to free healthcare your gp would send you for mental evaluation.

just how conditioned can you get to actually not want free healthcare?

check out how the british nhs works, yes it's struggling due to conservative underfunding but it's miles better than anything america have had, ever.



posted on Aug, 7 2017 @ 04:01 AM
link   

originally posted by: growler
a reply to: ItsNotIronic

if you became a hypochondriac due to free healthcare your gp would send you for mental evaluation.

just how conditioned can you get to actually not want free healthcare?

check out how the british nhs works, yes it's struggling due to conservative underfunding but it's miles better than anything america have had, ever.


I will check it out.

All the people I know from Canada and Europe hate their healthcare after experiencing the US. They say you will die waiting in queue back home.



posted on Aug, 7 2017 @ 07:04 AM
link   
a reply to: ItsNotIronic

Not that it would happen, but what's the problem with that scenario?



posted on Aug, 7 2017 @ 11:05 AM
link   

originally posted by: ItsNotIronic
All the people I know from Canada and Europe hate their healthcare after experiencing the US. They say you will die waiting in queue back home.
Three points...
1) It's pretty obvious that if you have the dough to waltz into boutique clinics, you are not going to be impressed with 'waiting in a queue'. Simple fact is that the vast majority of us don't.
2) I know an awful lot of people and not one has skipped off to the states for treatment. No need.
3) Nor do I know anybody who has died 'waiting in a queue'. You may have to wait for elective surgery but if the need is urgent, it gets taken care of. There is NO reason that the US cannot have UHC as well.



posted on Aug, 7 2017 @ 12:50 PM
link   
I hope what you meant is $4300 per family. "Taxpayer" is a pretty generic term. My wife pays taxes does that mean $8600 per couple/family? I would not describe $700+ each month as "surprisingly affordable". That's higher than my mortgage payment.

Also just my opinion whatever the estimate is by the time the govt manages to run the program it will cost double that.



posted on Aug, 7 2017 @ 01:02 PM
link   

originally posted by: JohnnyCanuck

originally posted by: ItsNotIronic
All the people I know from Canada and Europe hate their healthcare after experiencing the US. They say you will die waiting in queue back home.
Three points...
1) It's pretty obvious that if you have the dough to waltz into boutique clinics, you are not going to be impressed with 'waiting in a queue'. Simple fact is that the vast majority of us don't.
2) I know an awful lot of people and not one has skipped off to the states for treatment. No need.
3) Nor do I know anybody who has died 'waiting in a queue'. You may have to wait for elective surgery but if the need is urgent, it gets taken care of. There is NO reason that the US cannot have UHC as well.


I've heard that emergency services are okay, but disease management is barely existtant.

And that really sucks to pay in 60% of your income, then have to pay full price for a boutique clinic.
edit on 7-8-2017 by ItsNotIronic because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 7 2017 @ 01:05 PM
link   

originally posted by: Aazadan
a reply to: ItsNotIronic

Not that it would happen, but what's the problem with that scenario?


The problem with everyone rushing off the the hospital for any minor affliction, real or imagined, is that the $4000 per year price will not hold.

Higher rates of service with lower accountability will turn that $4K into $40K.



posted on Aug, 7 2017 @ 03:58 PM
link   

originally posted by: ItsNotIronic
I've heard that emergency services are okay, but disease management is barely existtant.
And that really sucks to pay in 60% of your income, then have to pay full price for a boutique clinic.

a) I was cured of prostate cancer for $32 out of pocket...parking at the oncology centre.
b) I don't know where your figures are coming from but there are people both here and in the US that want us to revert to a private system like you enjoy down there...they really really want a piece of that action! There are conservative 'think tanks' like the Frazer Institute who are in the business of churning out flawed data to convince stupid people that they would be better off under your system.
c) Our standard of living is at least as good as yours, if not better, partly because the banking shenanigans that conspired to relieve the Boomers of their home equity are illegal up here in spite of Conservative efforts otherwise).

Ergo...only a very wealthy individual or an idiot would want to swap systems with y'all.
edit on 7-8-2017 by JohnnyCanuck because: yes



posted on Aug, 8 2017 @ 06:37 PM
link   

originally posted by: ItsNotIronic
The problem with everyone rushing off the the hospital for any minor affliction, real or imagined, is that the $4000 per year price will not hold.

Higher rates of service with lower accountability will turn that $4K into $40K.


The problem with that argument, is that you're saying we should give up on access to health care because it's going to be out of reach regardless.

We shouldn't make it accessible because too many will use it, and then render it inaccessible.

My argument to that is that you're actually making a good reason to try it because it can't be any worse than what we have now.




top topics



 
25
<< 8  9  10   >>

log in

join