40
   

Congrats USA! Health care for all!! ??

 
 
roger
 
  1  
Reply Wed 22 Jun, 2011 05:14 am
@Green Witch,
I do not know who he is; just the first person cited in the article. I assume he is neither the mean, median, nor average. The entire article was devoted to German health insurance, so I do assume he is German.

Maybe we should all invest in Wellpoint, and let our outrageous profits pay our premiums.

I do not know what the French system is, except you say it's paid for with $4,000 in taxes. Does everyone in France pay $4,000 in taxes just for health care? I wonder what their entire tax bill is. Maybe the have a graduated system like the US, with many paying nothing at all. I don't know. I'm quite sure that any workable system is going to have the old and sick subsidized by the young and healthy. The young and healthy don't want to hear about it.
Green Witch
 
  2  
Reply Wed 22 Jun, 2011 05:29 am
@roger,
I've read the average part of the individual tax bill in France devoted just to healthcare is $3,600. It would vary due to income. I don't agree about the young and healthy. My employees are all under 30 and would be willing to pay via a tax for a national program if they got decent coverage for all the basics. None of them can afford private insurance and I pay what is considered a living wage in my area ($15-$20 per hour). They are all afraid of getting hurt and going to an emergency room. They all have friends or relatives that went broke because of medical bills (some with insurance). I have to go put them to work right now, so I may be slow to respond to a new post or I might add something this these thoughts.
djjd62
 
  1  
Reply Wed 22 Jun, 2011 05:36 am
@Green Witch,
an interesting report on the Global National News (Canadian network) the other night, the average cost in Canada to raise a child to the age of 18 was about $187,000 and in the US was about $267,000, the difference was related almost solely to healthcare costs
Green Witch
 
  1  
Reply Wed 22 Jun, 2011 07:24 am
@djjd62,
Yes, and another big difference is not all American children have health insurance. Most likely their parent(s) work for a company that does not offer it or their parent(s) have their own business and cannot afford to buy it. At least a Canadian parent knows they will never have to decide between taking their child to a doctor or buying groceries and paying rent. We had a children's mobile health clinic come into my rural area last year and parents literally camped out in tents to get their kids a basic check-up or deal with problems they could not afford an office visit for. Every parent in the waiting zone was either employed without insurance or had recently lost a job according to the people who organized the event. We sadly joked about asking Doctors Without Borders to start a clinic in our town.
0 Replies
 
Irishk
 
  1  
Reply Wed 22 Jun, 2011 10:33 am
I was doing a lot of reading about various health care systems in other countries back when our own debate was going hot and heavy -- mainly to see, if we changed ours, which might work best here.

I remember liking Germany's model a lot. France's, I think, most closely resembles ours with employers picking up a lot of the tab and, of course, individual taxes -- more than one, as I recall. France has a relatively high unemployment rate, but I don't know if that's related or not.

NPR ran an interesting series of articles around this time last year on the sustainability of Europe's generous welfare systems. I think their conclusion was that, based on a variety of factors, it wasn't without some major changes and sacrifices by the general citizenry.
Green Witch
 
  1  
Reply Wed 22 Jun, 2011 11:08 am
@Irishk,
I like to think we can look at all these models and take the best of them to create our own system. There is no Utopia, but we need to do better than what we have. We have great technology and doctors, but only the rich or well insured have access- sometimes even being rich and insured is no guarantee as my father can tell you. He spends a crazy amount of time talking to his insurance company about what they will and will not pay for. The policy is pointless as they make up the definitions of coverage as claims are made. Everyone needs to pay into a system to get a more equal system. Some people will always have more because they can afford it, but we all need to have the basic security of primary and emergency care. I would happily pay for that with my taxes. I want our government to function like an insurance company with an army. I feel secure because of our military and I would like to feel secure in my healthcare for the same reason.
0 Replies
 
Thomas
 
  1  
Reply Wed 22 Jun, 2011 11:20 am
@Irishk,
Irishk wrote:
I remember liking Germany's model a lot. France's, I think, most closely resembles ours with employers picking up a lot of the tab and, of course, individual taxes -- more than one, as I recall.

According to Wikipedia, France runs its healthcare system as a social insurance, much as America runs Social Security and Medicare. Insurance is jointly paid by employers and employees. Doctors write their bills to the national health insurance agency. They are employed in the private sector (in contrast to the National Health Service in Britain, where they're government employees).

Irishk wrote:
France has a relatively high unemployment rate, but I don't know if that's related or not.

I doubt it. France's unemployment rate of 9.6 percent is high, but comparable to the United States' 9.1 percent. Canada, which organizes its health care system along similar lines as France does, and is otherwise more similar to the United States than France is, has a lower unemployment rate than the United States (7.4%) does. I admit that's not a proper statistical regression. But until somebody offers one, I think we can assume unemployment and healthcare are unrelated.

Irishk wrote:
NPR ran an interesting series of articles around this time last year on the sustainability of Europe's generous welfare systems. I think their conclusion was that, based on a variety of factors, it wasn't without some major changes and sacrifices by the general citizenry.

How sustainable did they say medical care is under America's more privatized system? Given the retirement of the Baby Boomers, the general citizenry will face sacrifices and changes no matter if healthcare is organized as a private good or as a public service.
Green Witch
 
  1  
Reply Wed 22 Jun, 2011 12:15 pm
Some American doctors are so fed up they opting out of the system:
Doctor as renegade -- accepts cash, checks, eggs or pie, not insurance
http://minnesota.publicradio.org/display/web/2011/06/20/ground-level-rural-health-care-renegade-rural-doctor/
Rockhead
 
  4  
Reply Wed 22 Jun, 2011 12:50 pm
@Green Witch,
it is going to start getting dramatically worse for those without...

Our state is drying up all the funding for helping those without coverage. Yours will follow soon enough.

and basic coverage is almost worthless. and over $400 a month.

I have a chronic debilitating disease.

I was let go from my last full time job directly because of Obama being elected, and the fear that my small business (I was the only employee) would be required to offer me some kind of healthcare. He was a longtime "friend" of mine who asked me to help him start it up, and I installed all of the computer system that made it possible to let me go.

In the 3 years that I have been unemployed, I have talked to numerous companies about a job. mostly part time.

None of them want to talk anymore when I tell them I am sick. Thanks, we'll call you if something comes up...

And even if I would lie about it (I won't), it would become evident at some point that I was not quite right all the time.

It costs $50 for a visit to the clinic.

they have limited minor testing (blood, urine, normal stuff) available at a reduced rate as an additional fee.

any major testing, (cat scans, colonoscopy, MRI) have to be paid for at regular price, or you have to qualify for a special program)

I don't qualify.

The corporations that run this country are happy with the system right where it is.

Until we become dissatisfied with their rule, this is how things will be...
hawkeye10
 
  2  
Reply Wed 22 Jun, 2011 01:47 pm
@Rockhead,
Quote:
and basic coverage is almost worthless. and over $400 a month
it is shocking how bad this insurance is for most people...between the deductible and that they often only pay 50-75% of the bill after the deductible if they decide it is covered on most of these plans getting seriously sick will still cost $10K out of pocket plus another 4-5K for the insurance. For someone making $10 a hour there is not much difference between $10k and $100K or $1 million...they cant pay it.
hawkeye10
 
  1  
Reply Wed 22 Jun, 2011 02:14 pm
@hawkeye10,
Quote:
The national debt will exceed the size of the entire U.S. economy by 2021 — and balloon to nearly 200 percent of GDP within 25 years — without dramatic cuts to federal health and retirement programs or steep tax increases, congressional budget analysts said Wednesday.

The dire outlook from the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office comes as the White House and congressional leaders are locked in negotiations aimed at cutting spending and stabilizing future borrowing. The CBO report highlights the enormity of that task and the immense difficulty of paying off the debt, given an aging population and soaring health-care costs.


Over the long term, the CBO said, a projected explosion in government spending outside interest on the debt is “attributable entirely” to the ballooning cost of “Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, and (to a lesser extent) insurance subsidies” intended to help finance coverage for the uninsured under President Obama’s new health-care law.

The health care programs are the main drivers of that growth,” the CBO said, responsible for 80 percent of the projected rise in spending on those programs over the next 25 years


http://www.washingtonpost.com/business/economy/congressional-budget-office-warns-of-debt-explosion/2011/06/22/AGNwb2fH_story.html?hpid=z1

And Obama wasted a year fighting to get more people insurance, IE perpetuating and enriching a broken health care system, and adding costs to the nation when we need to be drastically reducing costs.
0 Replies
 
Irishk
 
  1  
Reply Wed 22 Jun, 2011 02:50 pm
@Thomas,
Thanks for the Wiki link, Thomas. It's been a couple of years since I was looking all that stuff up and I may have been thinking of an article I read which said (ironically) that France was thinking of moving more towards our type of system through various reforms (co-pays, a fee-for-service system for its state-run hospitals, staff reductions, etc.)

Quote:
How sustainable did they say medical care is under America's more privatized system? Given the retirement of the Baby Boomers, the general citizenry will face sacrifices and changes no matter if healthcare is organized as a private good or as a public service.

Yeah, they didn't focus much on comparison with our problems...except to mention, as I recall, the difference in projected growth rate between the U.S. and eurozone. And the series didn't focus solely on health care issues/costs, but also social spending on long-term unemployment benefits and pension systems. Part of what probably prompted it was the large protests in France going on at the time over Sarkozy upping the retirement age from 60 to 62 while talking of welfare cuts. Not a new sacrifice for us so much since many here already work past that age, I guess.

It was interesting. I'm betting I saved the link in my gazillion bookmarks from last year. All I need to do is wade through them to find it lol.
0 Replies
 
jcboy
 
  1  
Reply Wed 22 Jun, 2011 06:56 pm
@Green Witch,
Well, I guess it was a matter of time. And really, when you see which way this country, and individual states under the control of Republicans are heading with kowtowing to the rich and corporate, it is completely understandable.


Quote:
Man robs bank for $1 hoping to get healthcare in jail:
0 Replies
 
Butrflynet
 
  3  
Reply Wed 22 Jun, 2011 07:06 pm
http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2011/06/22/n-j-republicans-bill-would-jail-govt-workers-for-enforcing-health-reforms/

N.J. Republican’s bill would jail gov’t. workers for enforcing health reforms

By Stephen C. Webster
Wednesday, June 22nd, 2011 -- 3:57 pm

A bill proposed by a state assemblywoman in New Jersey would have government employees thrown in jail for up to five years if they attempt to enforce any part of the health reforms passed by Congress last year.

Its sponsor -- Assemblywoman Alison Little McHose (R) -- reportedly copied much of the bill's text word for word from the Tenth Amendment Center, a fringe conservative group that promotes states' rights over the federal government. The parallel was first spotted by reporter Matt Friedman at The New Jersey Star Ledger.

If passed, the law would mandate a $1,000 fine for any government worker or contractor who upholds federal laws pertaining to health care. It would also recommend prison terms up to five years, although it leaves that decision to judges who would potentially hear prosecutions brought under the proposed law.

The bill, however, has to overcome a significant roadblock: the U.S. Constitution, which gives the federal government "supremacy" over the states. The Supreme Court has long held that the federal government supercedes the states in matters where it is acting within its constitutional authority.

Unless the Supreme Court throws out the health reforms -- which is unlikely -- McHose's legislation has little chance of ever being enforced. Were it to pass the New Jersey legislature and become law, the federal government would take the matter to the courts and could potentially withhold funding for numerous state programs.

Finn dAbuzz
 
  1  
Reply Wed 22 Jun, 2011 09:31 pm
@Butrflynet,
So they should not break the law, and if they do, they will be punished.

Obamacare wasn't sent to earth by God. It is no more or less a piece of legislation that the NJ bill.

If someone in NJ feels compelled by principle to attempt to enforce Obamacare, despite a law that tells them they cannot, then they need to accept the consequences of their actions.

RABEL222
 
  1  
Reply Thu 23 Jun, 2011 12:29 am
July 1st is coming up and my private insurance is going up another 75bucks a month. Happy days!!!!
roger
 
  1  
Reply Thu 23 Jun, 2011 12:46 am
@RABEL222,
My Part D would have more that doubled, and with a really big cutback to the formulary. Happy ObamaCare!!!

I canceled it, of course.
Thomas
 
  2  
Reply Thu 23 Jun, 2011 06:14 am
@Finn dAbuzz,
Finn dAbuzz wrote:
Obamacare wasn't sent to earth by God. It is no more or less a piece of legislation that the NJ bill.

Although Obamacare wasn't sent to Earth by god, it was sent to America in a duly-enacted federal law. According to the US constitution's supremacy clause, federal law, if constitutional, trumps state law. If the state of New Jersey thinks Obamacare is unconstitutional, it needs to make this case in federal court, as some other states have. Having chosen not to challenge the law there, New Jersey has to enforce it. It doesn't get to cherry-pick which federal laws it wants to enforce.
0 Replies
 
Green Witch
 
  2  
Reply Thu 23 Jun, 2011 06:45 am
@roger,
Roger, Would you prefer if you didn't have Medicare and just had private insurance? I would include that you never had to pay into it. Do you think you would have been better off putting those dollars away for medical use now. Do you think the Republicans have better plans for Medicare or should eliminate it in the long run?

"Obamacare" was twisted and red pencilled to kowtow to whiny Republicans who want to see Obama fail, it has nothing to do with a real, workable system that will cover all Americans and have everyone paying a fair share. It is the worst ideas of both parties, but at least it keeps the issue on the table.
0 Replies
 
parados
 
  1  
Reply Thu 23 Jun, 2011 06:52 am
@Finn dAbuzz,
Finn dAbuzz wrote:

So they should not break the law, and if they do, they will be punished.
So who is going to punish the GOP for breaking Federal law in writing such an obvious unconstitutional law? It's the citizens of NJ that will have to pay for defending this if it becomes state law when it is clearly unconstitutional.

Quote:

Obamacare wasn't sent to earth by God. It is no more or less a piece of legislation that the NJ bill.
It is Federal law, which has precedent over state law. It really has little to do with God and everything to do with how US law works. States can't punish people for enforcing Federal law.

Quote:

If someone in NJ feels compelled by principle to attempt to enforce Obamacare, despite a law that tells them they cannot, then they need to accept the consequences of their actions.


Which principle are you talking about Finn? The principle where states can ignore Federal law? That isn't a principle, it is an attempt to undermine the US constitution.
 

Related Topics

 
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 05/03/2024 at 01:04:24