Democracy For America: Healthcare for All

[HAL 9000 96]

We can guarantee healthcare for all if we give every American the freedom to choose between keeping their private insurance - if they have any - and a universally available public healthcare option like Medicare.

Okay, so lets say that most people who have private insurance decide to keep their private insurance. I'm guessing we are still going to have to pay for it. How does this universally available public healthcare option get paid for? Do we who have private insurance have to pay for both? Because I think the main reason people without insurance right now don't have it is because they don't have the money for it. In fact, many people who don't have health insurance cannot even come close to paying for it. Taking even $100 a month from a lot of these people's budgets right now could cause more hardship than they are prepared to deal with.

So, if the people without insurance aren't going to pay into the system who is?

Dale, I'm paying close to $400 a month in insurance premiums, not including co-pays. If I no longer need to have private insurance, then that is a savings of over $400 a month - or about $5,000 per year. Explain to me how switching from paying private insurance to a single payer insurance is going to increase individuals cost for health insurance?

This is exactly what I'm talking about. Its not different for YOU or ME because we are already paying. But unless I'm misunderstanding the intent of this program, it is seeking to insure people who are NOT paying. It would seem to me that insuring the rest of the country is going to cost more..no?

But is that seriously going to be, in your opinion, what would really happen? Freeloaders getting FREE healthcare? Somehow... after all the economic mayhem we've gone through... I doubt that would even be on the table politically. There won't be such a thing as a free lunch anymore. Unemployed, poor Americans, etc... will likely have to render some kind of service to benefit from something like nationalized healthcare. Although life and health should not be conditioned to that extent? Right? Or are we going to allow this society to continue stooping to a level of selfishness that (FREELOADERS ASIDE) will hurt our own people in the longrun?

[dalegg 143]

We can guarantee healthcare for all if we give every American the freedom to choose between keeping their private insurance - if they have any - and a universally available public healthcare option like Medicare.

Okay, so lets say that most people who have private insurance decide to keep their private insurance. I'm guessing we are still going to have to pay for it. How does this universally available public healthcare option get paid for? Do we who have private insurance have to pay for both? Because I think the main reason people without insurance right now don't have it is because they don't have the money for it. In fact, many people who don't have health insurance cannot even come close to paying for it. Taking even $100 a month from a lot of these people's budgets right now could cause more hardship than they are prepared to deal with.

So, if the people without insurance aren't going to pay into the system who is?

Dale, I'm paying close to $400 a month in insurance premiums, not including co-pays. If I no longer need to have private insurance, then that is a savings of over $400 a month - or about $5,000 per year. Explain to me how switching from paying private insurance to a single payer insurance is going to increase individuals cost for health insurance?

This is exactly what I'm talking about. Its not different for YOU or ME because we are already paying. But unless I'm misunderstanding the intent of this program, it is seeking to insure people who are NOT paying. It would seem to me that insuring the rest of the country is going to cost more..no?

But is that seriously going to be, in your opinion, what would really happen? Freeloaders getting FREE healthcare? Somehow... after all the economic mayhem we've gone through... I doubt that would even be on the table politically. There won't be such a thing as a free lunch anymore. Unemployed, poor Americans, etc... will likely have to render some kind of service to benefit from something like nationalized healthcare. Although life and health should not be conditioned to that extent? Right? Or are we going to allow this society to continue stooping to a level of selfishness that (FREELOADERS ASIDE) will hurt our own people in the longrun?

That's not what I said man. And that is my point. This is going to cost people who cannot afford anything money they don't have. And they are going to be a little bit shocked when they get the bill.

[dalegg 143]

We can guarantee healthcare for all if we give every American the freedom to choose between keeping their private insurance - if they have any - and a universally available public healthcare option like Medicare.

Okay, so lets say that most people who have private insurance decide to keep their private insurance. I'm guessing we are still going to have to pay for it. How does this universally available public healthcare option get paid for? Do we who have private insurance have to pay for both? Because I think the main reason people without insurance right now don't have it is because they don't have the money for it. In fact, many people who don't have health insurance cannot even come close to paying for it. Taking even $100 a month from a lot of these people's budgets right now could cause more hardship than they are prepared to deal with.

So, if the people without insurance aren't going to pay into the system who is?

Dale, I'm paying close to $400 a month in insurance premiums, not including co-pays. If I no longer need to have private insurance, then that is a savings of over $400 a month - or about $5,000 per year. Explain to me how switching from paying private insurance to a single payer insurance is going to increase individuals cost for health insurance?

This is exactly what I'm talking about. Its not different for YOU or ME because we are already paying. But unless I'm misunderstanding the intent of this program, it is seeking to insure people who are NOT paying. It would seem to me that insuring the rest of the country is going to cost more..no?

But is that seriously going to be, in your opinion, what would really happen? Freeloaders getting FREE healthcare? Somehow... after all the economic mayhem we've gone through... I doubt that would even be on the table politically. There won't be such a thing as a free lunch anymore. Unemployed, poor Americans, etc... will likely have to render some kind of service to benefit from something like nationalized healthcare. Although life and health should not be conditioned to that extent? Right? Or are we going to allow this society to continue stooping to a level of selfishness that (FREELOADERS ASIDE) will hurt our own people in the longrun?

That's not what I said man. And that is my point. This is going to cost people who cannot afford anything money they don't have. And they are going to be a little bit shocked when they get the bill.

By the way- if the plan does stipulate that every American right now starts paying like $300 a month and we all are covered, then okay, I'm on board, because like you say uninsured are still getting medical services and the bill is currently being paid pay viewers like you and me. I'm just skeptical that is actually going to happen.

[HAL 9000 96]

We can guarantee healthcare for all if we give every American the freedom to choose between keeping their private insurance - if they have any - and a universally available public healthcare option like Medicare.

Okay, so lets say that most people who have private insurance decide to keep their private insurance. I'm guessing we are still going to have to pay for it. How does this universally available public healthcare option get paid for? Do we who have private insurance have to pay for both? Because I think the main reason people without insurance right now don't have it is because they don't have the money for it. In fact, many people who don't have health insurance cannot even come close to paying for it. Taking even $100 a month from a lot of these people's budgets right now could cause more hardship than they are prepared to deal with.

So, if the people without insurance aren't going to pay into the system who is?

Dale, I'm paying close to $400 a month in insurance premiums, not including co-pays. If I no longer need to have private insurance, then that is a savings of over $400 a month - or about $5,000 per year. Explain to me how switching from paying private insurance to a single payer insurance is going to increase individuals cost for health insurance?

This is exactly what I'm talking about. Its not different for YOU or ME because we are already paying. But unless I'm misunderstanding the intent of this program, it is seeking to insure people who are NOT paying. It would seem to me that insuring the rest of the country is going to cost more..no?

But is that seriously going to be, in your opinion, what would really happen? Freeloaders getting FREE healthcare? Somehow... after all the economic mayhem we've gone through... I doubt that would even be on the table politically. There won't be such a thing as a free lunch anymore. Unemployed, poor Americans, etc... will likely have to render some kind of service to benefit from something like nationalized healthcare. Although life and health should not be conditioned to that extent? Right? Or are we going to allow this society to continue stooping to a level of selfishness that (FREELOADERS ASIDE) will hurt our own people in the longrun?

That's not what I said man. And that is my point. This is going to cost people who cannot afford anything money they don't have. And they are going to be a little bit shocked when they get the bill.

I know that's not what you said.

As for the people that have to front up cash they don't have- I suggest you look at its status right now because you have people that 'do have' cash and yet they still end up mired in endless bills WITH insurance. I can't imagine what it would be like to get really sick in this country WITHOUT a job because I lost mine, without insurance, etc, and have some jacka$$ tell me I want to freeload just to stay healthy enough to survive.

Perhaps when the national healthcare agenda hits front page the politicians will write the legislation to either make it an option for folks that may not need it, or that by having this new competitor, as well as more volume-based pressure, the private folks start thinking more in terms of health and less in profits... etc. But those that can't afford even the premiums from the beginning should have the option to seek the healthcare they need and commit contractually to some kind of service to society that evens out the rather ridiculous and selfish notion of freeloading.

[HAL 9000 96]

We can guarantee healthcare for all if we give every American the freedom to choose between keeping their private insurance - if they have any - and a universally available public healthcare option like Medicare.

Okay, so lets say that most people who have private insurance decide to keep their private insurance. I'm guessing we are still going to have to pay for it. How does this universally available public healthcare option get paid for? Do we who have private insurance have to pay for both? Because I think the main reason people without insurance right now don't have it is because they don't have the money for it. In fact, many people who don't have health insurance cannot even come close to paying for it. Taking even $100 a month from a lot of these people's budgets right now could cause more hardship than they are prepared to deal with.

So, if the people without insurance aren't going to pay into the system who is?

Dale, I'm paying close to $400 a month in insurance premiums, not including co-pays. If I no longer need to have private insurance, then that is a savings of over $400 a month - or about $5,000 per year. Explain to me how switching from paying private insurance to a single payer insurance is going to increase individuals cost for health insurance?

This is exactly what I'm talking about. Its not different for YOU or ME because we are already paying. But unless I'm misunderstanding the intent of this program, it is seeking to insure people who are NOT paying. It would seem to me that insuring the rest of the country is going to cost more..no?

But is that seriously going to be, in your opinion, what would really happen? Freeloaders getting FREE healthcare? Somehow... after all the economic mayhem we've gone through... I doubt that would even be on the table politically. There won't be such a thing as a free lunch anymore. Unemployed, poor Americans, etc... will likely have to render some kind of service to benefit from something like nationalized healthcare. Although life and health should not be conditioned to that extent? Right? Or are we going to allow this society to continue stooping to a level of selfishness that (FREELOADERS ASIDE) will hurt our own people in the longrun?

That's not what I said man. And that is my point. This is going to cost people who cannot afford anything money they don't have. And they are going to be a little bit shocked when they get the bill.

By the way- if the plan does stipulate that every American right now starts paying like $300 a month and we all are covered, then okay, I'm on board, because like you say uninsured are still getting medical services and the bill is currently being paid pay viewers like you and me. I'm just skeptical that is actually going to happen.

I am also a skeptic to a degree. Insurance companies really need to be restructured to make them insurers and not necessarily huge for-profit schemes. This is going to take a LOT of pushing of people that think they are entitled to gouge the population just because they've gotten away with it for the last 3-4 decades.

[dalegg 143]

I know that's not what you said.

As for the people that have to front up cash they don't have- I suggest you look at its status right now because you have people that 'do have' cash and yet they still end up mired in endless bills WITH insurance. I can't imagine what it would be like to get really sick in this country WITHOUT a job because I lost mine, without insurance, etc, and have some jacka$$ tell me I want to freeload just to stay healthy enough to survive.

Perhaps when the national healthcare agenda hits front page the politicians will write the legislation to either make it an option for folks that may not need it, or that by having this new competitor, as well as more volume-based pressure, the private folks start thinking more in terms of health and less in profits... etc. But those that can't afford even the premiums from the beginning should have the option to seek the healthcare they need and commit contractually to some kind of service to society that evens out the rather ridiculous and selfish notion of freeloading.

That part doesn't seem realistic. So, I have the choice to pay for a low cost government ran healthcare system, or a higher cost healthcare system not ran by the government for exactly what I'm paying now. I wonder which system will have the better doctors?

[one...two...tree 2,762]

We can guarantee healthcare for all if we give every American the freedom to choose between keeping their private insurance - if they have any - and a universally available public healthcare option like Medicare.

Okay, so lets say that most people who have private insurance decide to keep their private insurance. I'm guessing we are still going to have to pay for it. How does this universally available public healthcare option get paid for? Do we who have private insurance have to pay for both? Because I think the main reason people without insurance right now don't have it is because they don't have the money for it. In fact, many people who don't have health insurance cannot even come close to paying for it. Taking even $100 a month from a lot of these people's budgets right now could cause more hardship than they are prepared to deal with.

So, if the people without insurance aren't going to pay into the system who is?

Dale, I'm paying close to $400 a month in insurance premiums, not including co-pays. If I no longer need to have private insurance, then that is a savings of over $400 a month - or about $5,000 per year. Explain to me how switching from paying private insurance to a single payer insurance is going to increase individuals cost for health insurance?

This is exactly what I'm talking about. Its not different for YOU or ME because we are already paying. But unless I'm misunderstanding the intent of this program, it is seeking to insure people who are NOT paying. It would seem to me that insuring the rest of the country is going to cost more..no?

Well, if you add the amount your employer is paying for your health insurance to what you pay, then the potential savings combined can be substantial. But I would say this - I don't care if having a single payer insurance ends up costing me the same amount as what I was paying for private insurance in premiums, knowing that switching from private to a single payer system will cover everyone and all medical expenses. No more lingering medical bills for anyone - insured, under insured, or uninsured. I believe that medical care is a fundamental human right and I believe that our country has upheld that in that no one is ever refused treatment in emergency situations. The argument is that with a single payer system, those people can now get treatment before it becomes an emergency and thereby substantially lowering the actual costs for healthcare in this country.

[luckytxn 2,264]

Sheep are enjoying the thought of eating at the trough for free. Can't wait till the sheep realize the bill from the bureaucracy becomes due.

[dalegg 143]

Well, if you add the amount your employer is paying for your health insurance to what you pay, then the potential savings combined can be substantial. But I would say this - I don't care if having a single payer insurance ends up costing me the same amount as what I was paying for private insurance in premiums, knowing that switching from private to a single payer system will cover everyone and all medical expenses. No more lingering medical bills for anyone - insured, under insured, or uninsured. I believe that medical care is a fundamental human right and I believe that our country has upheld that in that no one is ever refused treatment in emergency situations. The argument is that with a single payer system, those people can now get treatment before it becomes an emergency and thereby substantially lowering the actual costs for healthcare in this country.

Yeah, right now I think businesses are probably liking the idea of turning over healthcare costs to the tax payers. I do not buy the idea that doing this is only going to keep our costs the same though. You've got to first get all the doctors to accept lower salaries, and all of the drug companies to lower their prices. Before they do that, you are going to have to change malpractice laws so their own liability insurance premiums lower.

And I don't agree that health care is a fundamental human right. Thats saying- No matter what, no matter how much it costs, regardless of whether the person giving you healthcare would go into bankruptcy providing you with healthcare, he is obligated to serve you.

[one...two...tree 2,762]

Sheep are enjoying the thought of eating at the trough for free. Can't wait till the sheep realize the bill from the bureaucracy becomes due.

Tex, you are being blatantly ignorant or just plain stupid. If you have medical insurance now, it is with a private insurance carrier. The proposal is to switch from private insurance (for profit) to a single payer (non-profit). Doctors and hospitals will remain the same as they are now.

[HAL 9000 96]

I know that's not what you said.

As for the people that have to front up cash they don't have- I suggest you look at its status right now because you have people that 'do have' cash and yet they still end up mired in endless bills WITH insurance. I can't imagine what it would be like to get really sick in this country WITHOUT a job because I lost mine, without insurance, etc, and have some jacka$ tell me I want to freeload just to stay healthy enough to survive.

Perhaps when the national healthcare agenda hits front page the politicians will write the legislation to either make it an option for folks that may not need it, or that by having this new competitor, as well as more volume-based pressure, the private folks start thinking more in terms of health and less in profits... etc. But those that can't afford even the premiums from the beginning should have the option to seek the healthcare they need and commit contractually to some kind of service to society that evens out the rather ridiculous and selfish notion of freeloading.

That part doesn't seem realistic. So, I have the choice to pay for a low cost government ran healthcare system, or a higher cost healthcare system not ran by the government for exactly what I'm paying now. I wonder which system will have the better doctors?

That's the system the hysterical part of the anti-national health system wants you to see.

Sure, there are many ways of defining how this public/private dichotomy can be... it doesn't necessarily have to be a 1:1 adversarial relationship where the bottom line is quality.

You can look at the public part as being the basic, crucial, preventative, all the key terms for living a healthy life. IF THIS WERE A HEALTHCARE SYSTEM WHERE EVERYONE WAS REQUIRED TO PARTICIPATE IN. At least Obama's proposal doesn't look like that kind of system.

There are PLENTY of doctors in this country that NEED to be affiliated to hospitals, primary practitioner groups, etc, just to handle the private insurance part of things.

If you envision a system where public providers suck, then there's not much of a point arguing any further. However, if you envision a public system where, instead of the users funding tons of corporate excess in overhead, greed, and shareholder profitability, the user can act as a shareholder in funding his/her own well being... then the medical community will follow suit.

I write this to you next to a window from where I can see Emergency Helicopters land with patients that are likely going to be indebted for the next 10 years to pay hospital costs that their insurance carriers do not cover.

Sheep are enjoying the thought of eating at the trough for free. Can't wait till the sheep realize the bill from the bureaucracy becomes due.

Tex, you are being blatantly ignorant or just plain stupid. If you have medical insurance now, it is with a private insurance carrier. The proposal is to switch from private insurance (for profit) to a single payer (non-profit). Doctors and hospitals will remain the same as they are now.

Its Socialist sheep, Steven. Why bother while he gets taken to the slaughterhouse where those insurance company execs are getting their lamb chops from?

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

Sheep are enjoying the thought of eating at the trough for free. Can't wait till the sheep realize the bill from the bureaucracy becomes due.

Tex, you are being blatantly ignorant or just plain stupid. If you have medical insurance now, it is with a private insurance carrier. The proposal is to switch from private insurance (for profit) to a single payer (non-profit). Doctors and hospitals will remain the same as they are now.

Less a bunch of administrative staff that they currently have to employ to accommodate the worst red tape of any heath care system anywhere in the world which has been brought to us by - you guessed it - the private enterprise insurance system we continue to serve.

[HAL 9000 96]

Sheep are enjoying the thought of eating at the trough for free. Can't wait till the sheep realize the bill from the bureaucracy becomes due.

Tex, you are being blatantly ignorant or just plain stupid. If you have medical insurance now, it is with a private insurance carrier. The proposal is to switch from private insurance (for profit) to a single payer (non-profit). Doctors and hospitals will remain the same as they are now.

Less a bunch of administrative staff that they currently have to employ to accommodate the worst red tape of any heath care system anywhere in the world which has been brought to us by - you guessed it - the private enterprise insurance system we continue to serve.

TOO MUCH LOGIC!!

[one...two...tree 2,762]

Sheep are enjoying the thought of eating at the trough for free. Can't wait till the sheep realize the bill from the bureaucracy becomes due.

Tex, you are being blatantly ignorant or just plain stupid. If you have medical insurance now, it is with a private insurance carrier. The proposal is to switch from private insurance (for profit) to a single payer (non-profit). Doctors and hospitals will remain the same as they are now.

Less a bunch of administrative staff that they currently have to employ to accommodate the worst red tape of any heath care system anywhere in the world which has been brought to us by - you guessed it - the private enterprise insurance system we continue to serve.

TOO MUCH LOGIC!!

To be fair, I think Dale brought up an important issue - how will doctors and hospitals be able to negotiate fees for their services under a single-payer insurance system? What will stand in the way of this public insurance from dictating what they will pay to doctors and hospitals?

[Ban Hammer 13,360]

Sheep are enjoying the thought of eating at the trough for free. Can't wait till the sheep realize the bill from the bureaucracy becomes due.

Tex, you are being blatantly ignorant or just plain stupid. If you have medical insurance now, it is with a private insurance carrier. The proposal is to switch from private insurance (for profit) to a single payer (non-profit). Doctors and hospitals will remain the same as they are now.

so steven says, until he realizes the government can't run something as simple as a lemonaide stand without cost overruns and red tape.