IT'S TIME FOR UNIVERSAL HEALTH CARE

@cicerone imposter,

cicerone imposter wrote:

It may have worked in Germany, but many countries are having problems with funding their health plans, and it has become more acute in this economic recession.

No doubt that we have problems, too.

But do you, ci, pay the same sum for your health as ... say five years ago? Or two years?

And does your health plan pay you for instance a three week cure after a major operation? At the age of 24 as well as as at the age of 69? Are children and spouses free of charge? ... ...

So, if other industrialised countries can deal with it, why can't the USA?

3 Replies

@Advocate,

Advocate wrote:

The Republicans look peevish and stupid in their absolute opposition to health-care reform. It now is 16 % of our economy, and would have soon been 25 % but for Obama's reform. In the rest of the advanced nations, health care is about 8 % or less. I think that the public, other than the totally deluded sheep on the right, will catch on.

Un huh. Why do I get the feeling that 25% comes from the same place as the number of jobs Obama has "saved"?

1 Reply

@Walter Hinteler,

Good points, Walter. I'm thinking that your health plan was developed over a number of years; not done as a 'must pass' proposition in less than a year. In other words, our system is ripe for an overhaul, but our people in Washington are more interested in passing anything they think will ensure reelection, than something useful to all the people of the country.

Oh, you surely remember the three weeks I spent in the hospital. My out of pocket cost for the hospital only totaled $1,000.00. Not too shabby for a broken system. Outpatient physical therapy over a period of four months ran to about another $1,000.00, as best I recall. Thery were also several follow on doctors appointments and prescriptions. Insurance covered most, but certainly not all of that. At a rough guess, my total out of pocket ran to about $2500.00.

Yes, there are people with no insurance, but we are still wondering at the final cost of going from ~ 85% uninsured to 94% uninsured.

0 Replies

@roger,

You didn't know that health-care costs are going up a rate more than double the cost-of-living?

3 Replies

@Walter Hinteler,

Other industrialized nations may have universal health care without any financial problems, but I see very little in the way of cost savings from the US plan just approved by congress.

Do you? If so, where are the "savings" that's supposed to reduce cost - or not add one dime to our deficit?

As for most of the industrialized countries that now have universal health care, I'm not sure how many are able to fund them as the world economy continues to suffer. I know that the aging population of Germany and the decreasing number of those that pay into the health plan are causing financial problems as well.

I was never against universal health care for the US, but the US plan has very little in how it plans to save cost, and increase the demand without increasing the supply.

These two major issues aren't being addressed by the current legislation.

0 Replies

@Advocate,

And your point is . . . ?

0 Replies

@Advocate,

Gas costs have gone up more than triple the cost of living over the last 10 years.

Spending on iPods has gone up over 3000% over the last 10 years.

1 Reply

@maporsche,

maporsche wrote:

Gas costs have gone up more than triple the cost of living over the last 10 years.

True, but in the bigger picture gas is relatively stable by comparison:

http://fintrend.com/inflation/images/charts/Oil/Inflation_adjusted_gasoline_price.jpg

Healthcare, on the other hand, is indeed outpacing the Cost of Living pretty consistently.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/0/01/InflationTuitionMedicalGeneral1978to2008.png

1 Reply

@OCCOM BILL,

Too right. And comparing the price of healthcare to Ipods, as some here would do, is asinine.

Cycloptichorn

0 Replies

@woiyo,

woiyo wrote:

You will find that in those countries you listed, the cost ito the taxpayers is exorbatabt andthe quality if care if less than in our current system.

That certainly comes as a surprise to this citizen of Germany, "one of the countries you listed" as you put it. I have been treated under the German system for 37 of my almost 41 years.

There's a lot of things that are great about the US, a lot of reasons why I'm staying in the US on an immigration visa. But your healthcare system isn't one of them. In my own experience, it's mediocre and overpriced by the standards of Western Europe.

2 Replies

@roger,

If CI's predictions are correct then repeal is certainly possible. You know that the Repubs will not repeal the whole thing, but only the most unpopular parts i.e., Medicare cuts, individual mandates, etc., and of course all the bribes for Senate votes. They will then replace those components with a more sensible and less intrusive bill, similar to those they've touted over the past couple months.

The existing bill is very unpopular, and based on the fact that by 2012 very few, if anyone, will be on the health care dole at that time, it'll certainly be possible to repeal it. It would be much more difficult if the Dems had had the sense to put the thing into effect immediately.

1 Reply

@Walter Hinteler,

Walter,
And the mean income tax rate in the US is less than 28%...what do you pay in Germany? According to the chart below it's around 55%.

Thank you very much, but I have no desire to have my Federal income tax rate doubled simply to have the medical care I currently get degraded to something equivalent to the poor quality care I used to get when serving in the US military.

3 Replies

@Advocate,

This argument is one that has never made sense to me. Sure health-care costs are going up, as anything in high demand increases in cost. But the market will eventually control these costs, just as it does the cost of gasoline or Ipods.

It is nonsensical to think that any one commodity in a free market can ever continue to rise unconstrained.

0 Replies

@slkshock7,

slkshock7 wrote:

And the mean income tax rate in the US is less than 28%...what do you pay in Germany? According to the chart below it's around 55%.

The income tax here is between 14% and 42% (for those, who have to pay it), even in 2005, the date your chart gives, it was 15% to 42%.
(In 1988, it was between 22% and 56%.)

The average today is less than 30%.

2 Replies

@slkshock7,

slkshock7 wrote:

And the mean income tax rate in the US is less than 28%...what do you pay in Germany? According to the chart below it's around 55%

That isn't the mean income tax rate, that's probably the top marginal income tax rate -- in both cases. Your chart is bogus.

0 Replies

@Walter Hinteler,

Walter Hinteler wrote:

The income tax here is between 14% and 42% (for those, who have to pay it), even in 2005

Well, I suppose the "Solidaritätszuschlag" would count as an income tax in international comparisons, although German authorities don't call it that. You could also make a case, albeit a weaker one, that the Church Tax belongs into the same category. That would bring you to 55%.

1 Reply

@Walter Hinteler,

Quote:

The income tax here is between 14% and 42% (for those, who have to pay it), even in 2005, the date your chart gives, it was 15% to 42%.
(In 1988, it was between 22% and 56%.)

The average today is less than 30%.

the chart is useless, because all it shows is the highest possible tax rate. The meaningful number would be the average tax actually paid. You cant say that American corporations pay tax at 40% when most pay nothing or next to nothing because they have gotten tax breaks for themselves written into the tax code. Nor do many people pay anything close to the advertised personal rate.

1 Reply

@hawkeye10,

hawk, That's correct; income tax rates are almost meaningless. Even people with the exact same income pay different tax amounts. The tax codes are so confusing, even two tax experts can't arrive at the same tax liability for the same individual.

Quote:

Congress on tax complexity: Who us?
Congress frequently holds hearings on tax simplification so members can denounce the tax code's complexity. Each time, congressional experts and outside think tanks provide useful simplification ideas. Then when the TV cameras are turned off, Congress promptly ignores them and votes for more special interest breaks. The result: The number of pages in the tax code and regulations doubled from 26,300 in 1984 to 54,846 by 2003, according to tax publisher CCH.

0 Replies

@Thomas,

The highest possible income tax in Germany is 42% (45% for those with a higher income than 250,000 €/a). "Solidaritätszuschlag" is 5.5% of the income tax; church tax is between 2.5% and 3.7% of the taxable income.

That's not 55% in total.

Focus has a nice online calculator: even those earning more than 50,000€/a (pre any tax) don't get more deductions (that's taxes, unemployment insurance, pension insurance, health insurance, long-term care insurance) than about 42%.

1 Reply

@slkshock7,

Quote:

Thank you very much, but I have no desire to have my Federal income tax rate doubled simply to have the medical care I currently get degraded to something equivalent to the poor quality care I used to get when serving in the US military.

I wonder what data set you are using to come to the conclusion that you will receive poorer quality care than you do now? The statistics that I have seen certainly do not support that conclusion, and by all accounts, most countries with european-style health care pay far less for similar procedures than we do.

Cycloptichorn

0 Replies

IT'S TIME FOR UNIVERSAL HEALTH CARE

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know