Confidence in U.S. Health Care System Has Grown in Recent Months

[GaryC 7]

Confidence in U.S. Health Care System Has Grown in Recent Months

Monday, August 03, 2009

Forty-eight percent (48%) of U.S. voters now rate the U.S. health care system as good or excellent. The latest Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey shows that just 19% rate it as poor.

These figures reflect a significant increase in support for the health care system over the past few months. In May, just 35% of adults nationwide rated the system as good or excellent. A year ago, just 29% of Likely Voters rated the system in such positive terms.

The new polling also shows that 80% of those with insurance rate their own coverage as good or excellent. That’s up from 70% in May.

There is a huge partisan gap on perceptions of the U.S. health care system. Seven-out-of-10 Republicans rate it as good or excellent, but only one-of-four Democrats agree. Among those not affiliated with either major political party, 53% rate the current system as good or excellent while just 18% say it’s poor.

Over the past few months, as the health care reform debate has raged, confidence in the current system has increased significantly among Republicans and unaffiliated voters. There has been little change among Democrats.

Just 28% say they are willing to pay higher taxes so that all Americans can have health insurance. Sixty percent (60%) are opposed. Those figures are little changed since May.

Recent polling has shown that cost, not universal coverage, is the top concern about health care.

Seventy-four percent (74%) of voters rate the quality of care they receive as good or excellent. In May, just 62% of adults said the same.

Just seven percent (7%) now rate the quality of care they receive as poor. That’s little changed since May.

Polling last week showed that 47% of voters favor the health care reform plan working its way through Congress while 49% are opposed. However, those who oppose it show more intensity: Just 25% Strongly Favor the legislation while 41% are Strongly Opposed.

Seventy-eight percent (78%) say it’s likely the passage of health care reform will lead to higher taxes for the middle class.

A summary of recent polling on healthcare was released on Friday.

Caution should be used in comparing results between samples of Likely Voters and Adults. Differences on the same questions can sometimes be in the range of 3-5 percentage points. In general, samples of adults will show results a few points more favorable to President Obama.

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_con...n_recent_months

[dalegg 143]

Confidence in U.S. Health Care System Has Grown in Recent Months

Monday, August 03, 2009

Forty-eight percent (48%) of U.S. voters now rate the U.S. health care system as good or excellent. The latest Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey shows that just 19% rate it as poor.

These figures reflect a significant increase in support for the health care system over the past few months. In May, just 35% of adults nationwide rated the system as good or excellent. A year ago, just 29% of Likely Voters rated the system in such positive terms.

The new polling also shows that 80% of those with insurance rate their own coverage as good or excellent. That’s up from 70% in May.

There is a huge partisan gap on perceptions of the U.S. health care system. Seven-out-of-10 Republicans rate it as good or excellent, but only one-of-four Democrats agree. Among those not affiliated with either major political party, 53% rate the current system as good or excellent while just 18% say it’s poor.

Over the past few months, as the health care reform debate has raged, confidence in the current system has increased significantly among Republicans and unaffiliated voters. There has been little change among Democrats.

Just 28% say they are willing to pay higher taxes so that all Americans can have health insurance. Sixty percent (60%) are opposed. Those figures are little changed since May.

Recent polling has shown that cost, not universal coverage, is the top concern about health care.

Seventy-four percent (74%) of voters rate the quality of care they receive as good or excellent. In May, just 62% of adults said the same.

Just seven percent (7%) now rate the quality of care they receive as poor. That’s little changed since May.

Polling last week showed that 47% of voters favor the health care reform plan working its way through Congress while 49% are opposed. However, those who oppose it show more intensity: Just 25% Strongly Favor the legislation while 41% are Strongly Opposed.

Seventy-eight percent (78%) say it’s likely the passage of health care reform will lead to higher taxes for the middle class.

A summary of recent polling on healthcare was released on Friday.

Caution should be used in comparing results between samples of Likely Voters and Adults. Differences on the same questions can sometimes be in the range of 3-5 percentage points. In general, samples of adults will show results a few points more favorable to President Obama.

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_con...n_recent_months

Are there any polls out there asking how many people would accept higher taxes if it meant they didn't have to pay insurance premiums and their increased taxes would be lower than the amount they saved on insurance premiums- or is that too difficult a question to ask?

[GaryC 7]

Are there any polls out there asking how many people would accept higher taxes if it meant they didn't have to pay insurance premiums and their increased taxes would be lower than the amount they saved on insurance premiums- or is that too difficult a question to ask?

They don't ask it because that isn't a possibility. The overall cost of health care will rise above what we pay now if the government takes it over. Even the CBO said this would be the result of Obamacare.

[luckytxn 2,264]

Obama the Socialist promised no middle class taxes so it all moot.

[dalegg 143]

Are there any polls out there asking how many people would accept higher taxes if it meant they didn't have to pay insurance premiums and their increased taxes would be lower than the amount they saved on insurance premiums- or is that too difficult a question to ask?

They don't ask it because that isn't a possibility. The overall cost of health care will rise above what we pay now if the government takes it over. Even the CBO said this would be the result of Obamacare.

I think that's only true because the goal is to cover everyone. The other part of the question is true- in order to cover everyone you obviously have start charging those who aren't paying for healthcare something (or I guess just tax the ####### out of the rich). But I think for the average Joe if he cut off his existing insurance payments, his overall take home pay would be more even with the needed tax hike. It would almost have to be I think.

Edited August 4, 2009 by dalegg

[dalegg 143]

Obama the Socialist promised no middle class taxes so it all moot.

Maybe he's not planning on running for re-election.

[GaryC 7]

Are there any polls out there asking how many people would accept higher taxes if it meant they didn't have to pay insurance premiums and their increased taxes would be lower than the amount they saved on insurance premiums- or is that too difficult a question to ask?

They don't ask it because that isn't a possibility. The overall cost of health care will rise above what we pay now if the government takes it over. Even the CBO said this would be the result of Obamacare.

I think that's only true because the goal is to cover everyone. The other part of the question is true- in order to cover everyone you obviously have start charging those who aren't paying for healthcare something (or I guess just tax the ####### out of the rich). But I think for the average Joe if he cut off his existing insurance payments, his overall take home pay would be more even with the needed tax hike. It would almost have to be I think.

It will be like every other government program. After a few years the cost will skyrocket. At that point it will be to late. I can just see it now, soon we will be hearing stories about how the health care system is about to bankrupt and we need to raise taxes or cut services. It has happend to every other government program. What makes you think this would be any different?

[luckytxn 2,264]

Are there any polls out there asking how many people would accept higher taxes if it meant they didn't have to pay insurance premiums and their increased taxes would be lower than the amount they saved on insurance premiums- or is that too difficult a question to ask?

They don't ask it because that isn't a possibility. The overall cost of health care will rise above what we pay now if the government takes it over. Even the CBO said this would be the result of Obamacare.

I think that's only true because the goal is to cover everyone. The other part of the question is true- in order to cover everyone you obviously have start charging those who aren't paying for healthcare something (or I guess just tax the ####### out of the rich). But I think for the average Joe if he cut off his existing insurance payments, his overall take home pay would be more even with the needed tax hike. It would almost have to be I think.

It will be like every other government program. After a few years the cost will skyrocket. At that point it will be to late. I can just see it now, soon we will be hearing stories about how the health care system is about to bankrupt and we need to raise taxes or cut services. It has happend to every other government program. What makes you think this would be any different?

Don't worry, Obama the Socialist will fix it.

The Koolaid is starting to wear off for some and cooler heads are prevailing. The hard core sheep will continue to be in denial until one by one they go over the cliff.

[luckytxn 2,264]

Are there any polls out there asking how many people would accept higher taxes if it meant they didn't have to pay insurance premiums and their increased taxes would be lower than the amount they saved on insurance premiums- or is that too difficult a question to ask?

They don't ask it because that isn't a possibility. The overall cost of health care will rise above what we pay now if the government takes it over. Even the CBO said this would be the result of Obamacare.

I think that's only true because the goal is to cover everyone. The other part of the question is true- in order to cover everyone you obviously have start charging those who aren't paying for healthcare something (or I guess just tax the ####### out of the rich). But I think for the average Joe if he cut off his existing insurance payments, his overall take home pay would be more even with the needed tax hike. It would almost have to be I think.

Partially true. The take home pay may be a tad better but there will be additional taxes that one must pay for if one does any shopping at all. Look at Canada's sales tax and the tax on everything else. The over all taxes that one will endure will be more than that cost of premiums. Also as mentioned before there has never been a Federal program that didn't cost what was thought of but usually always becomes more. With a Federal bureaucracy thrown in and we are looking at a huge cost just to administer this thing.

[dalegg 143]

Are there any polls out there asking how many people would accept higher taxes if it meant they didn't have to pay insurance premiums and their increased taxes would be lower than the amount they saved on insurance premiums- or is that too difficult a question to ask?

They don't ask it because that isn't a possibility. The overall cost of health care will rise above what we pay now if the government takes it over. Even the CBO said this would be the result of Obamacare.

I think that's only true because the goal is to cover everyone. The other part of the question is true- in order to cover everyone you obviously have start charging those who aren't paying for healthcare something (or I guess just tax the ####### out of the rich). But I think for the average Joe if he cut off his existing insurance payments, his overall take home pay would be more even with the needed tax hike. It would almost have to be I think.

It will be like every other government program. After a few years the cost will skyrocket. At that point it will be to late. I can just see it now, soon we will be hearing stories about how the health care system is about to bankrupt and we need to raise taxes or cut services. It has happend to every other government program. What makes you think this would be any different?

Actually I don't understand the high price tag their putting on it now. It seems like an average health insurance plan costs about $1,000 a month per family.

So that's $12,000 a year per family. We've got like 120,000,000 families so that's less than 1.5 billion dollars a year if every family was covered. In 10 years its less than 15 billion dollars so why I am I hearing numbers between $700 billion and 1 trillion for 10 years already?

Something doesn't add up...or my math is wrong.

Are there any polls out there asking how many people would accept higher taxes if it meant they didn't have to pay insurance premiums and their increased taxes would be lower than the amount they saved on insurance premiums- or is that too difficult a question to ask?

They don't ask it because that isn't a possibility. The overall cost of health care will rise above what we pay now if the government takes it over. Even the CBO said this would be the result of Obamacare.

I think that's only true because the goal is to cover everyone. The other part of the question is true- in order to cover everyone you obviously have start charging those who aren't paying for healthcare something (or I guess just tax the ####### out of the rich). But I think for the average Joe if he cut off his existing insurance payments, his overall take home pay would be more even with the needed tax hike. It would almost have to be I think.

Partially true. The take home pay may be a tad better but there will be additional taxes that one must pay for if one does any shopping at all. Look at Canada's sales tax and the tax on everything else. The over all taxes that one will endure will be more than that cost of premiums. Also as mentioned before there has never been a Federal program that didn't cost what was thought of but usually always becomes more. With a Federal bureaucracy thrown in and we are looking at a huge cost just to administer this thing.

What? Why do we have to have a national sales tax if we have an obamacare tax?

[G&R 0]

Obama the Socialist promised no middle class taxes so it all moot.

Maybe he's not planning on running for re-election.

i think thats the plan too. big change, buy votes let the cards fall.

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

Are there any polls out there asking how many people would accept higher taxes if it meant they didn't have to pay insurance premiums and their increased taxes would be lower than the amount they saved on insurance premiums- or is that too difficult a question to ask?

They don't ask it because that isn't a possibility. The overall cost of health care will rise above what we pay now if the government takes it over. Even the CBO said this would be the result of Obamacare.

I think that's only true because the goal is to cover everyone. The other part of the question is true- in order to cover everyone you obviously have start charging those who aren't paying for healthcare something (or I guess just tax the ####### out of the rich). But I think for the average Joe if he cut off his existing insurance payments, his overall take home pay would be more even with the needed tax hike. It would almost have to be I think.

Dale, would you feel comfortable with the status quo? That millions of working Americans simply aren't offered health insurance from their employers or would you be in favor of an alternative to a public option....like requiring employers offer health insurance to their employees?

[dalegg 143]

Are there any polls out there asking how many people would accept higher taxes if it meant they didn't have to pay insurance premiums and their increased taxes would be lower than the amount they saved on insurance premiums- or is that too difficult a question to ask?

They don't ask it because that isn't a possibility. The overall cost of health care will rise above what we pay now if the government takes it over. Even the CBO said this would be the result of Obamacare.

I think that's only true because the goal is to cover everyone. The other part of the question is true- in order to cover everyone you obviously have start charging those who aren't paying for healthcare something (or I guess just tax the ####### out of the rich). But I think for the average Joe if he cut off his existing insurance payments, his overall take home pay would be more even with the needed tax hike. It would almost have to be I think.

Dale, would you feel comfortable with the status quo? That millions of working Americans simply aren't offered health insurance from their employers or would you be in favor of an alternative to a public option....like requiring employers offer health insurance to their employees?

Now see, nobody caught my mathmatical error there. It's not 1.5 billion, it's 1.5 trillion (hard to count all of those zeros), so yeah over 10 years on our current system we'd be talking like 15 trillion, which makes 1 trillion sound not so bad at all.

So if we assume that only some 15 to 20 % of americans are uninsured, then we must be spending about a trillion dollars every year as a nation, no? #######, just looked it up and its like 3 trillion!!

3 trillion dollars! Wait a momento. even if costs remained exactly as they are now without the existing rate of increase we've seen over the past 10 years, we're talking 30 trillion in 10 years! What kind of argument is a 1 trillion dollar price tag when we're looking at 30 trillion already?? This is insane! The government can be pretty wasteful but they really have a lot of wiggle room on this one!

So no. I do not feel comfortable with the status quo. In fact it seems to me that most politicians- even on the right- say that healthcare has to be fixed. I don't see how its going to be fixed unless a nuetral party steps in. The best option we have for that neutral party unfortunately is our government. While I shudder at the thought of my DMV clerk taking this over, I also have to say that I haven't really received steller performance with the existing yahoos.

I had a conversation with one of my coworkers, whom is a very intelligent dude by the way, and he made a good point- he wants to retire early. Thinks he's going to be ready at 55. However, there is no way he can do that. He cannot even budget his healthcare costs because he is clueless as to what they will be. Regardless of how many years you pay into the system while you are working, the minute you stop paying you are worthless to them, so going without a job is impossible. Early retirement is only for the independantly wealthy now because of this. That's ####### to me if there's another way. And I don''t give a f**k if you call it socialism!!

Edited August 4, 2009 by dalegg

[mawilson 2,133]

Actually I don't understand the high price tag their putting on it now. It seems like an average health insurance plan costs about $1,000 a month per family.

So that's $12,000 a year per family. We've got like 120,000,000 families so that's less than 1.5 billion dollars a year if every family was covered. In 10 years its less than 15 billion dollars so why I am I hearing numbers between $700 billion and 1 trillion for 10 years already?

Something doesn't add up...or my math is wrong.

Your math is wrong.

120,000,000 families times $12,000 a year per family equals $1.5 trillion, not $1.5 billion.

For 10 years = $15 trillion. That's of course assuming the government is going to pay for everyone and everything.

Fortunately, we only need to insure $40,000,000 people - let's say $20,000,000 families. Times $120,000 for 10 years and you get $2.4 trillion.

Factor in the so-called "cost savings" (highly unlikely if you ask me) and you go from $2.4 trillion to just under a trillion.

[dalegg 143]

Actually I don't understand the high price tag their putting on it now. It seems like an average health insurance plan costs about $1,000 a month per family.

So that's $12,000 a year per family. We've got like 120,000,000 families so that's less than 1.5 billion dollars a year if every family was covered. In 10 years its less than 15 billion dollars so why I am I hearing numbers between $700 billion and 1 trillion for 10 years already?

Something doesn't add up...or my math is wrong.

Your math is wrong.

120,000,000 families times $12,000 a year per family equals $1.5 trillion, not $1.5 billion.

For 10 years = $15 trillion. That's of course assuming the government is going to pay for everyone and everything.

Fortunately, we only need to insure $40,000,000 people - let's say $20,000,000 families. Times $120,000 for 10 years and you get $2.4 trillion.

Factor in the so-called "cost savings" (highly unlikely if you ask me) and you go from $2.4 trillion to just under a trillion.

See you didn't read my above post. I already corrected that mistake. But there's no way it should be $12,000 a year per family if there isn't any profit involved, so the 1 trillion figure doesn't seem too unreasonable. So take that plan times 6 for everyone, 6 triillion, plus a little government overspending we'll call it ten trillion over ten years. We're going to pay that in just 4 years with our current system and everyone isn't covered.

Of course the problem here is that in order to do this you would definitely have to raise everyone's taxes and its still going to be nearly impossible to convince a lot of people that paying $200 in taxes is better than paying $400 in insurance costs.