Will There EVER Be a GOP Health Care Plan?
- Thread starter What Would Jesus Do?
- Start date
No, it is not.
You clearly have no idea what "communism" is.
Simply a word you like to toss around when you don't understand something.
Maybe it was deleted along with 30,000 emails or it could have been wiped out with one of Mueller's phones.
So I've never had to pay for a road or public school. I do pay taxes which are redirected to pay for them. Does that make America communist?
GoFundMe does ALL of that, bro. U just gotta push out the better sob-stories...
To be fair, he wouldn't have known any of the other words he tends to throw around like socialism or Marxism.
Nope. This happens when middlemen lose their chunk.
Saw this firsthand in CO, when ACA came out and the state-operated Health Op provided alternative insurance policies - same coverages as UHC, Cigna, BCBS. Only, they were 15%-20% lower on premiums. Same coverage; less cost.
Cigna, alone, lobbied something like $3M to eliminate the cost-sharing so they could not remain successful. The year after that entity disappeared, costs out here jumped at a higher percentage than the previous years.
I've stated it many many times: states need underwritten, nonprofit insurance options to compete head-head with regular insurers.
Iowa saw EXACTLY the same thing: when they privatized their Medicare payouts to "regular" insurance, the costs for administration skyrocketed, and providers either didn't get paid, or got paid less. If you lived in Iowa, you witnessed that firsthand. But I think the MAGA glasses are obscuring those facts for you.
Take those off and come join something the rest of us refer to as "reality"....
Fine just have the feds set the price per procedure in stone, no exceptions and bake the saving in immediately.
I don’t want the usual “saving will eventually be realized” bullshit.
I would be 100% on board with that.
if the maximum charge amount was set in stone regardless of Medicare, Medicaid, Private insurance, or cash we could see who was more efficient. Government or private.
Last edited:
I hope not, please keep the government out as much as possible. Not sure of the desire to have something that should be had in the first place
He totally unfunded it through executive order which he had to do to go around rhino Republicans who were against in doing it because they wanted votes but it backfired on the Rhino idiots because people don't like Obamacare I don't like paying for it or don't like Obamacare ruining their own health insurance
Right? Our current system is the best in the world!!
66.5 percent of all bankruptcies in the US were tied to medical issues
As I've tried to point out many times over the last 10 years, the ACA was primarily about getting people covered, less about cutting costs.
If not for GOP obstruction, we might have been able to turn to the cost cutting part a couple of years after the ACA was passed.
Who knows, maybe President Biden will be able to make progress on costs.
Only if the Democrats are able to keep the House and retake the Senate.
I don't think you can do that without a complete re-make of the health care system in this country.
The support just simply isn't there to do that job.
Yeah, the 2010 midterms put the GOP in position to block anything and everything they didn't like. Which is exactly what they did.
Dems need to take the Senate this year - AND hang on to both houses in 2022. We won't even be back to 2016 at the end of Biden's term unless they can do that.
And more of those Dem seats need to be filled by progressives. Or they may not be trying hard enough to fix things.
Part of the appeal of Medicare for All. Yeah, it's a big change but even if you phase it in slowly it's where we need to end up.
If providers don't have to worry about if customers are going to have to pay their bills or not, they would need less money. Firstly because you wouldn't be covering for someone who isn't able to pay their bill and secondly because you wouldn't be paying the salary of the people who work in billing and collections who exist solely to try to chase down that money in the first place. If everyone is covered, you don't need those people.
Lastly you wouldn't be paying as much overhead with your insurance company as well.
I'm much more in favor of a transition towards a healthcare system modeled after Germany's. Medicare for all seems modeled more on the Canadian system but with even more benefits than the Canadian system provides.
Germany has better capacity per capita in terms of physicians per capita, hospital beds per capita, and ICU beds per capita than the US. Honestly if you combine all 3 figures, Germany has one of the best healthcare capacities in the world by far.
An added bonus is that if you read about Germany's healthcare system the conversion from our system to theirs would not be nearly as massive of a change as attempting to convert us to Canada's system.
If you think that was a great system prior to 2010....Then you must also believe Ottumwa is really the Lost City of Atlantis
Having employer provided health care is not freedom. In fact, it has the opposite effect on those people who don't like their job but have to stay on just for the health care benefits.
I also don't understand how Obama brought down the health care system. It actually expanded health insurance providers markets by bringing in millions who were previously uninsured.
Last edited:
You might pay less if insurers weren't skimming off profits, paying bloated salaries, and passing on high admin costs.
And note that they are doing that at the same time as they are looking for every possible excuse to deny paying claims.
Further note that that's the case for properly run private insurance. Their job isn't to assure the delivery of health care to patients. Their job is to make profits for investors.
Medicare for All eliminates all those problems. Sure, it needs to be properly run, too. But since the accounting side is public, not private, we can actually manage that if we want to.
What a shame we didn't spend the other 75% of the time this country has existed also building a great country.
Medicare is already well-established to be far more efficient in terms of cost -overhead compared with private insurers.
Again: you lived that reality in Iowa.
Healthcare in Germany - Wikipedia
If anyone is interested in how healthcare works in Germany they should read the link. Basically you pay a fee of 7.3% of your salary (Your employer matches this) on the first 62,550 Euros of income. With that you are enrolled into one of 130 different "sickness funds" (basically health insurance) and they cover the services that the government dictates. All of the members of your immediate family are enrolled with you. If you earn more than the $62,550 you can choose to buy private insurance if you wish.
From my understanding you pay for your prescriptions but the out of pocket costs for prescriptions is capped at 2% of your income (1% with people with chronic conditions)
Switzerland also uses a similar system I've found and is also rated highly.
This is where we should be looking. This is an easier transition, it covers everyone, and their capacities per capita are higher than our own.
Healthcare in Switzerland - Wikipedia
Switzerland is similar to Germany, but allows the health insurance company to set the premiums and if the premium is more than 8% of your income the government covers the rest.
Unlike Germany, Switzerland does have deductibles.
This. If we were smart and willing to do the work, the correct decision is probably to tear down the current system and build a new one from scratch.
If you get sick, almost better for your family if you just die. Especially if you have life insurance. Otherwise, once you've finally received a discharge in your bankruptcy case, you only have to wait another few months to a year for your mortgage lender to finish foreclosing so you can restart the clock on your credit.
The lobby for status quo in healthcare is strong due to the $$ made off the complexity and dysfunction. Too few care about providing reasonable healthcare to all nor do they consider the overall cost savings with an efficient and fair system. Those in power don't want the gravy train to end.
Great something so simple and obvious. Should be no problem to 100% guarantee me savings over what I pay now with zero risk otherwise.
I cover my entire family for about $435 a month. I look forward to the Democrats saving me money.
You pay $435 for family coverage in a month? What does your employer pay?
Yep. The weird thing is that you can get a better price from the doctor for his/her services if you DON'T use insurance. That right there should tell everyone there is something wrong with the system.
Insurance companies just add a large bureaucracy to the system and increase the costs of service. One would think that "conservatives" would be working to do away with this bureaucracy more so than the democrats, but they don't.
About $11,000
so you are now going to tell me my insurance is going up?
and before you say it. I know of no employers ever that currently give their employees any extra if they turn down insurance. That goes for private and government employees. For example...the teachers in my district don’t get $10k more in salary if they turned down the district’s health plan.
you see? That’s why millions of people don’t want it. They have a good deal.
No, you don't.
Not if it's on a company-subsidized plan.
Find out what the Cobra cost is for your plan, because that is the ACTUAL payment.
IMO, companies should be prohibited from subsidizing health insurance premiums. Pay people the difference in wages, which can be fully tax exempt, so they know the actual costs.
