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

originally posted by: the owlbear

originally posted by: rickymouse
I'm all for this, where could we get decent health insurance for four grand a year. It doesn't need dental, it could be like medicare is, I actually pay about a hundred bucks a month extra for part b and the Part D is covered by the wifes old employer and we pay about seventy bucks each for that..

Remember, if we had universal health care, we would not need health coverage on our auto insurance policies, our workers comp would not be so high, our employers could give us a raise if they paid for health insurance, and our homeowners insurance would be a little cheaper. On top of that, if it went total socialist, the doctors would not need to pay high premiums on their insurance, the government could do what other countries do, have a committee to look at things and limit liability.

We have a really screwed up health system, based on the staffof Hermes not the staff of medicine. I think that we should change this. I am sure a lot of doctors would agree, some are getting stressed out because of all the fibs they have to do to support medical trade jobs

It should include dental. Not fully, but screenings and pulling of teeth that are bad. Some tooth infections cause heart disease, attack, and worse. Knew a girl that had bad teeth, lost both legs under the knee while having a heart attack and almost died at thirty.

Knowing how some of the dentists here are selling more expensive procedures than are needed, I do not agree with putting any regular dental into healthcare. There can be optional packages people can buy to cover other things. Right now, if a doctor orders it, insurance companies are sometimes paying for procedures that are cosmetic and not health related. This includes plastic surgeries, which can be written as another necessary surgery and covered. Doctors do rape the system, most are not crooked but some are doing procedures that should not be covered by insurances and getting paid because they know how to work the system. We sometimes hear of doctors doing chemo when there is no cancer, making millions on these procedures. They get fined and lose their license, most times they do not go to jail. Why don't these people go to jail? Because almost every doctor does something like this on a smaller scale, you cannot burn one without burning another. Every doctor I have known was talked into twisting something to get the insurance to pay for something at one time or another in their career. You have to remember though, often this twisting gets people coverage for things they actually need.

originally posted by: luke1212
a reply to: rickymouse

are you kidding? your auto insurance/home insurance would skyrocket. the greedy insurance companys would have to make up the loss somewhere. i would imagine it would be near the same as health insurance is now.

They would not be paying out any money for health related bills, that part of insurance is actually one of the highest parts. It is getting so most health insurance companies are excluding auto accidents from being covered for medical, so you have to buy the full coverage medical instead of the health insurance paying first now. Ask your auto insurance carrier about this, I just had to boost mine up to full medical because our health insurance excludes auto accidents now to keep the costs down.

People do not understand the total cost of medical insurance on our society. Our health insurance is not the only medical insurance we are paying.

originally posted by: avgguy
So you're telling me that inexpensive is me paying about an extra $400 a month in taxes...

No, that's not what anyone is telling you.

...so that 2/3 of the country can sit on their asses and benefit from it? That sounds more like indentured servitude to me.

Two-thirds, huh? Kinda like the way some folks are now benefiting from lots of government intervention/involvement in the health system -- like the FDA, USDA, universities, Big Pharma corporations, etc. -- that the less fortunate do not benefit from? That sounds like the rich robbing the poor to me.

How about everyone pays in no matter how much they make and if you can't pay the bare minimum then you don't get coverage?

How about we just remove ALL taxpayer dollars and government involvement from the healthcare system and if you can't figure out how to take care of yourself then you don't get any medical care? And, well, those who can't should probably be removed from the gene pool anyway, right? We can just think of it as survival of the fittest -- as opposed to survival of the richest....

Or is indentured servitude (and people dying and suffering) okay when YOU are the one benefiting at their expense???

originally posted by: network dude
a reply to: carewemust

But, if we did have a government run Universal Healthcare system, would the doctors want to participate? Would GOOD doctors want to be part of this?

I hope you don't mind me replying to this.

My brother-in-law is a doctor and works for the NHS, and has done since he qualified. He is dedicated to NHS work and says medicine is his 'calling', not money. He doesn't care who is rich and who is poor, he says the NHS system allows him to treat anyone who is sick, not just those who can afford it. It allows him to not have to turn sick people away whilst knowing he is able to help them.

He could well easily get paid much much more if he worked in private medicine, but he says being a doctor isn't about just making lots of money, he could do that in other careers and work less hours for more pay and without doing 7 years med school.

People who work in medicine are very special people, they will often step up even if there is no money offered when someone needs help. My brother-in-law certainly would.

originally posted by: FuggleHop
a reply to: carewemust

I don't know which is worse socialism or communism.

Socialism for the corporations seems to work pretty well in this country, for the corporations.

Universal healthcare would be the standard in a civilized country claiming a government "of the people, by the people and for the people", but that's not what we have.

If military spending were brought under control, if the pentagon itself were brought under control, universal healthcare would be easy to finance.

a reply to: carewemust

Excellent thread. Very well written and presented -- thank you!

1. Do you feel that Universal Healthcare is such a huge shift in how we receive healthcare, that deciding to do it, or not to do it, should be voted on via a nationwide special election? The government presents us with the benefits, cost per person, type of taxes/fees, and then let us vote YES or NO?

I would love to see some form of nationwide special elections for healthcare and for many questions -- marijuana laws and tax reform also comes to mind. Issues such as this that have such a profound effect on virtually everyone should be decided by the people. At the time the Constitution was written, nationwide votes would not have been practical, but with today's technology it is quite practical -- much more practical than what we have now! Our critters have created a vacuum in DC that doesn't even allow for anything not "approved" by the top critters. I would even welcome a process of sorts, by which multiple plans could be presented to the voters to be voted upon, with the top two put to a final vote.

2. How much money would you personally be willing to pay in taxes/fees each year to be covered, like citizens are in the countries shown here: www.cnn.com... ??

Rather than a set dollar amount for everyone, I guess I would prefer a percentage of income for individuals, and a percentage of profits from corporations... maybe 10%? 15% But first and foremost, we have to break the stranglehold of Big Pharma and other outrageous costs to bring the costs down. We also need a Patients' Bill of Rights from the git-go, so that our rights and best interests are not only protected but are the focus and mission of any healthcare program we adopt.

a reply to: the owlbear


That 1-year, 30% penalty is stupid. I have a feeling that the Senate will replace it with a 6 month wait-time before you can get treatment for whatever just happened, to cause you to want health insurance all of a sudden. (Injury or Sickness)

It's seems like the dumbest stance to be against universal health care and if you have a system that puts a price on life then there will be needless suffering and death that could have been prevented.

If you pay any taxes at all then you should have your health covered as its a good investment for a country to keep its people healthy.

I make the claim that millions of people die from the greed caused by our current medical system. From the lack of cures big pharma makes to the endless supplies of side effect ridden drugs to keep you just going, to the poor people given no treatment until it's a terminal disease, and then bankrupting their family for trying to save them. Millions of people die because we let greed rule.

Healthcare and education should never cost aside from taxes and countries that invest in these are proven to have higher standards of living.

a reply to: Boadicea

I'm not benefiting at anyone's expense. I already pay an outrageous amount for healthcare and I work at a hospital. So not only do I pay into a system that benefits me very little I also literally care for the people that are quite literally taking money out of my pocket. I'm all for universal healthcare but it's not happening with a third of Americans paying taxes.

a reply to: carewemust

problem: Health Spending in U.S. Topped $3 Trillion Last Year

www.nytimes.com...

a reply to: avgguy

I'm not benefiting at anyone's expense. I already pay an outrageous amount for healthcare and I work at a hospital.

Unless you are the sole financial contributor to each and every taxpayer funded program and institution devoted to healthcare, then yes, you are benefiting at the expense of others who receive no such benefits.

I'm all for universal healthcare but it's not happening with a third of Americans paying taxes.

Actually, more like 55% paying personal income taxes, and pretty much anyone who spends any money paying taxes of all kinds. But that's really not the problem. It's crony capitalism, corporate welfare, and other government granted monopolistic laws and regulations that have so inflated the cost of health care that are the problem.

We cannot and will not fix anything by blaming the victims -- our fellow Americans -- rather than the perpetrators -- our critters in Washington.

a reply to: carewemust

With all due respect I wouldn't be so quick to think US doctors are any better than Canadian..Canada leads the way in many ways..cancer research is one off the top of my head.
Also if a doctor specialises they can make pretty good money, over a GP..I think they still do pretty good.
If you go into medicine to get rich you're doing it for the wrong reasons..imho.

a reply to: infolurker

For 2016 in Canada it was about 228 billion..roughly 11% GDP

a reply to: Boadicea

Isn't that how ancient Greek empire failed?

Straight up democracy where the folks voted directly on all sorts of benefits for themselves.

We never learn do we?

Our founders knew better.

I knew you'd come around

now this is something that should be considered, a good post.

originally posted by: avgguy
a reply to: Boadicea

I'm not benefiting at anyone's expense. I already pay an outrageous amount for healthcare and I work at a hospital. So not only do I pay into a system that benefits me very little I also literally care for the people that are quite literally taking money out of my pocket. I'm all for universal healthcare but it's not happening with a third of Americans paying taxes.

Govt could put a tax on tobacco and alcohol products (and other unhealthy products) to help fund a universal healthcare system like the UK does.

The smokers and alcoholics and those who choose unhealthy habits will pay more into the fund than those who live healthy. Put a tax on such products and even those who do not work will also be contributing when they buy these products, and not just those who work.

a reply to: doobydoll

Yup, soda, mac cheese among other carb loaded foods.

Thated go long ways in reducing type 2 diabetes costs which is major expense of medicaid.

They eat themselves into it, expect rest of us to pay, refuse to change diet after diagnosis.

Why pick on just smokers and drinkers

You know what, I can't help it: We told you so. We mentioned that several times. We provided information and data and examples.....

WE TRIED TO TELL YOU!!!

We tried to open your eyes. Next time we offer up something like that, could you all please listen before just fighting us because we're liberals?
Please? That'd be cool.

originally posted by: doobydoll

originally posted by: avgguy
a reply to: Boadicea

I'm not benefiting at anyone's expense. I already pay an outrageous amount for healthcare and I work at a hospital. So not only do I pay into a system that benefits me very little I also literally care for the people that are quite literally taking money out of my pocket. I'm all for universal healthcare but it's not happening with a third of Americans paying taxes.

Govt could put a tax on tobacco and alcohol products (and other unhealthy products) to help fund a universal healthcare system like the UK does.

The smokers and alcoholics and those who choose unhealthy habits will pay more into the fund than those who live healthy. Put a tax on such products and even those who do not work will also be contributing when they buy these products, and not just those who work.

We already have that. "Vice" taxes. Or "sin" taxes. Or "luxury" taxes. At the state level, anyway.
Besides the 'blue laws' that disallow liquor stores to open before noon on Sundays, and don't allow "hard" liquor (strong beer or anything stronger) to be sold in grocery stores. At least not here in my stupid-state of Kansas. And it doesn't go for health care (which makes good sense). It goes to the general fund.

Seven minute drive to Missouri, no problem. Cigarettes are half as expensive. All-encompassing liquor stores open at 9 on Sundays. Gasoline is cheaper, too. And now they have relaxed the laws for weed, too - just a $25 "ticket" now.

But here in Kansas? Oh no. No. Nonono. So what do we do? We million people who live within 20 minutes of the state line? Well, we drive to Missouri, of course! Saves us bunches of money....
kind of like the difference between buying dog food or diapers at an Interstate truck stop or tiny town filling station ($94 dollars a bag each) or the HyVee or Jewel or Walmart nearest to you.....

The stupidity of our Governor's fantasy is brazen, well-known, and an utter disaster, and everyone knows it who cares about such things. But did he accept the legislature's new law to expand Medicaid? NOPE. He vetoed it. He is a madman.
Even Trump is more reasonable.