2 hours in the emergency room cost me......

[Charade]

For the person who said he or she didn't want to be paying for other people's medical care, if you have insurance, aren't you doing this anyway? The insurance company sets its rates so that it covers everyone in the group, and makes a profit as well. So if you are healthy, but other people in your "group" have major surgeries or chronic illnesses, yes, you are paying for their health care through your insurance payments. That's how it works.

The difference between that kind of insurance and a national one is first, you have a much larger group of people, which in theory should help keep rates low. You also remove the profit element, which also should lower rates.

And by making it universal, you help to keep all the people in the country healthy, which I think is a beneficial thing.

Teresa

There are two elements to this. One is "cost of coverage" and the other is "quality of coverage".

IIRC, it cost me (out of my paycheck) about $360 a month to cover myself and my wife. That includes dental and glasses. My employer covers the difference. I'm not really sure what that is, I'd have to look it up. Suppose UHC costs 8 percent. My wife doesn't have healthcare taken out of her pay right now. So if UHC takes 8 percent of our combined income, that's way more than I currently pay. But no one can come up with a hard number as to what UHC (or NHC) would cost ME (and yes, the cost DOES concern me, if it doesn't concern others, that's fine). All I know is, if the government (the US) said it's gonna cost "$X" (or X percent in taxes or where ever they get the money from), it's guaranteed that it's gonna cost double or triple once implemented. That's what happened to the Medicare part-D prescription drug program.

Congress is great for using healthcare as a "wedge" issue. We should all have the same healthcare and pension plan they have. They don't have to deal with the issues that working families do.

 

[momto2girls]

That's the Canadian attitude too. WE don't hear people griping about paying for other people's care. We all know it's equal...that if the care is needed you will get it. It doesn't matter if you'er rich or poor. It doesn't matter if you pay little tax or alot of tax. We're ok with that. Why? For me, it's because society as a whole benefits from having a healthy population. But again, it's a mind-set we were born into. So we're ok with it. You may not be...but the majority of people in Canada are. Telling us that we're paying for others won't change that opinion. We're ok with that. Hard to understand for some but not if that's all you've ever known.

I completely understand what you are saying. I mentioned earlier in this thread that our two countries are very different culturally. This, in part, is what I was referring to.

Also, I think that many of us are totally frustrated with our government (both parties) and are tired of the waste and government messing up everything that they lay their hands on. I can't imagine why health care would be any different, so I'm not at all keen on the idea of letting the government meddle in it.

 

[Chicago526]

There are two elements to this. One is "cost of coverage" and the other is "quality of coverage".

IIRC, it cost me (out of my paycheck) about $360 a month to cover myself and my wife. That includes dental and glasses. My employer covers the difference. I'm not really sure what that is, I'd have to look it up. Suppose UHC costs 8 percent. My wife doesn't have healthcare taken out of her pay right now. So if UHC takes 8 percent of our combined income, that's way more than I currently pay. But no one can come up with a hard number as to what UHC (or NHC) would cost ME (and yes, the cost DOES concern me, if it doesn't concern others, that's fine). All I know is, if the government (the US) said it's gonna cost "$X" (or X percent in taxes or where ever they get the money from), it's guaranteed that it's gonna cost double or triple once implemented. That's what happened to the Medicare part-D prescription drug program.

Congress is great for using healthcare as a "wedge" issue. We should all have the same healthcare and pension plan they have. They don't have to deal with the issues that working families do.

Ah, but here's the thing. If the government starts covering health care, your company no longer has to cover the major portion of your insurance. I can't speak for you, but for my company they cover 90% of my premium, I'd guess that runs into the thousands of dollars per year, multiply that by my company's 350 employees and that's a tidy sum of money. The company no longer gets the tax write off for spending that on employee health care so they pay a bit more in taxes, but still keep the bulk of it. They can now afford to pay you more, reinvest it into the company and grow, or pay their shareholders a higher dividend for those companies that are corporations. Small buisness owners could keep it as profit and raise their own pay, or again, raise their employees pay or reinvest in the company to make it grow. The burden for companies would go way down, grow our economy, and raise tax revenue, helping to offset the cost to run government paid for health care.

Now, likely taxes would still have to be raised to cover the program, but with the burden of health care taken away from buisness, it shouldn't have to be raised as much. I think sometimes this gets overlooked when discussing the topic of UHC.

Does the cost of UHC concern me? Of course! I too want to know how it will affect my taxes. But having a DH with a major life long medical condition, I have to say the cost would have to be pretty dang high for me to be against it. I'd pay a lot to never have to worry about what will happen if we lose our employer paid for health insurance and we can't get or can't afford private coverage for DH.

Edited to add: It's funny you should mention Congresses health plan, because many of the UHC proposals heavily borrow ideas from their plan, if not copy it out-right.

 

[Charade]

Edited to add: It's funny you should mention Congresses health plan, because many of the UHC proposals heavily borrow ideas from their plan, if not copy it out-right.

Heavily? I want the WHOLE thing!

I want my health care and pay guaranteed for the rest of my of my life when I retire.

 

[SereneOne]

I am so glad someone brought this up! Paying for someone else's medical care is the concern? We all pay for the rich white men (mostly) to get the best insurance money can buy. And guess what? We also pay for the people on Medicaid and Medicare, so you are already paying for someone else's medical care. A decent UHC and you get that coverage TOO!

 

[cteddiesgirl]

Ok, but if you weren't making payments on old medical bills that money could go toward health insurance. Also, you choose to be a contract employee, no company gives benefits to contract employees. Because of your choices you don't have health insurance, that is a BIG difference from not being able to get insurance or being able to afford insurance. I am not saying that it is easy to get employers to offer better plans but that would be a solution to the problem.

When I was making payments on my bills, I made more money. It was not my choice to do contract work. It was they only job I'd been able to get for 6 months after actively looking. Something is better than nothing.

It is not my choice to make less money now than I did 4 years ago. It is not my choice to be without insurance. That choice was taken away from me with the low pay and no benefits. I guess I should have just remained unemployed for another 6 months? It is not my choice to not be able to have a vehicle so I can get to other areas of the city that has better pay.

It was not my choice to have an ovarian cyst that had to be removed 7 years ago. It is not my choice to be allergic to just about everything under the sun. It is not my choice to be only 4'7" and have everything about my body odd sized. It is not my choice to have to pay $8 for a bottle of soap. It is not my choice that I have to pay $6 for a bottle of shampoo. It is not my choice to have to pay $100 or more for a pair of shoes. It is not my choice to have to pay $80 for a bra. It is not my choice of where I live.
It is not my choice for a lot of things that I have to deal with in my life.
of the other scenarios I could choose, I could choose to be unemployed, I could choose to have hives and have open sores from the itching and scratching. I could choose to go barefoot. I could choose to go braless (but at DDD that hurts). I could also choose to live on the streets.

What do you think is better?

While there are some choices a person can make, every single thing is not a choice in everyone's lives. Our circumstances and what God gives us si sometimes out of our hands.

Ok, we pay LESS in income taxes, NO tax on any clothing or shoes for anyone, food, medications, with a 6.5% sales tax, pay zero for our medications with our plan. Our health insurance premiums are less then 2% of our income (actually only about .5% of our total income but the 2% is on DH's income and his company offers the health plan). Given this you pay a LOT more for what you have then we do.

We pay taxes on all clothing and shoes in Indiana. Certain foods we also pay taxes on. Not to mention state income taxes and county taxes. Sales tax on all goods is 7%.

For many of us it would cost more and we would receive inferior coverage to what we already have. Why would we want that?

How do you know it would be inferior? I don't think we're going to fire every single medical employee and hire in the street sweepers.
For many of us, UHC is really the best way to get help. The only other way is to loosen up restrictions on medicare/medicaid and let. Or we could just crack down on all the insurance companies and make them give everyone insurance at little to no cost and then crack down on the hosptals and doctors and make them charge only up to a certain amount for each service.

So what have you done about your situation? Have you looked for a job with better benefits, have you discussed this with your employer, have you looked for an individual plan that would give you coverage? You can complain all you want but your choices put you where you are at too.

Oh no!!!! I've never done anything at all to help myself. I'm just a poor idiot that never had an education and don't know how to do anything for myself.

I can't afford an individual plan. They all cost far to much for me to afford. And I can't get any help because I don't qualify, even with my low income.
I work for a consulting company working under contract on a project for the State of Indiana. They are not going to pay out any more in wages. And the company I work for has a policy of no benefits to contracted employees unless offered by the contracted company. The state's policy is absolutely no benefits to any temp or contracted employee.

As I said. My ultimate choice was either to be employed and at least making something, or to not be employed at all. Which choice would you have made?

Maybe you were lucky in life and in the gene pool to be able to have better choices to make. I'm not that lucky. While some luck you can make, most of it you can't.

I would love to have you (or anyone that keeps telling me it's my "choice") to walk in my life for just a month.

My husband and I have no insurance yet we have a vacation fund (a.k.a. a "hey what if something happens before we graduate college and we need it just in case" fund-- but the general thought is for a trip to Europe when we graduate)

There is no way we can afford insurance on top of books, tuition, utilities, gas, 1 car payment, car insurance (we actually are buying him braces b/c if he doesn't get them he'll supposedly loose his front teeth in 3 years.. and we're sweating the additional $175/month)

We live rent-free in a home my family owns but wasn't using. If it weren't for that, he'd probably lose his front teeth.

But really, what are we supposed to do? He's finishing school ASAP before his GI bill runs out, but since he's not active we're not covered. We don't qualify for any federal help because of the value of the vehicle he purchased while in the Marine Corps... it puts our "asset" level too high, but we're not trading it for a less dependable vehicle or a payment 'just in case'

So given i have no idea what the case is for the OP, how are we supposed to afford health insurance when we're barely cutting it now?

Oh you have to still pay for it. It was your choices that made you not be able to have insurance. At least this is what some people say.
I feel your pain though. If it wasn't for my dad, I'd be living out on the streets.

US health insurance is a quagmire. In my previous job (large employer, 1200+ employees), I paid $222 per paycheck (every other week) for HMO type health care for myself, DH, and DD age 14. Primary care physician, $20 copay at office, $50 copay at ER, $40 brand-name prescription copay, $20 generic copay, preapproval for specialists means no additional cost, hospital admission $50 copay for an entire stay. Pretty good plan, and we never worried about health insurance...until the research grant wasn't renewed and I lost my job with 2 weeks' notice. To COBRA this health care plan will cost me $888 every other week (or $23000 per year). Yup, my employer paid 75% of my health care cost. My DH is a 1/3 owner of a small company here. The state insurance plan for small companies is Dirigo. Dirigo would cost $1200 per month with a $3000 per person ($6000 per family) deductible. That works out to $20400 out of pocket per year before Dirigo would pay its PERCENTAGE of health costs. Let's see...unemployment is paying me $281 per week (or $14612 per year, if I should be unemployed that long...that's equivalent to a job paying $7.03 per hour). DH usually doesn't get paid as it's a small, start-up biotech company; priority salary is for the employees (both of them), not the owners...during the academic year he uses his PhD to teach at the local state University- brings home $820 per month (not now that it's summer, of course).

I get it... I understand how OP can have a vacation account but not be able to pay for health insurance. I can pay $25 or $50 a week into a vaca account, which would give me $1300-$2600 a year to take the 3 of us to WDW (easy-peesy to do it for that money!). It's coming up with the $222-$300 a month for a health insurance premium that has me stymied. It's NOT a question of priorities, it's a question of doing the math with the available dollars!!!

Did I mention that I have a master's degree, 20 yrs experience as a research scientist?

Oh. But it's your choice that you worked under a research grant that could be pulled.
It's your husband's choice for not making enough money.

Isn't that what some say, anyway?

Sad you would've paid less than that in insurance in a year. Which is why, even when I was a broke waitress I still had insurance. Now that I'm going back for my masters, I make sure I have insurance. I found that blue cross's tonic plan only costs me around one hundred dollars a month and it's worth every penny. My mom works for another insurance company and she was telling me about how high some bills are and then when she looks at the bottom there would be amount patient owed: $40 or some ridiculous amount and then they'd call to complain about that, when insurance paid like thousands of dollars. I'd rather be on the end of receiving a bill for $40 than $5000, and now states have programs for those that are un insured to get discounted rates if you're low on cash. You should look into that to make sure it doesn't happen again.

You still have to qualify for those programs. Even though I made less than $10K last year, I still don't qualify.

Not that anyone wants to, but I was watching Suze orman on Oprah and you could easily work at Starbucks part time. Not for the money! For the full coverage health insurance. You'd have to swallow your pride, but they offer it. There are other part time jobs where you could work as little as 10 hrs a week, and get their health insurance coverage. I'm a broke student and I make sure to have health insurance. Even when I drop under half time and it's not offered through the school, I have secondary health insurance because it's that important. There are programs through the state, you just have to research them, that would cut costs so that you aren't paying that high. The first page of this thread, the person who works at the hospital, lists all the types of insurance that the state offers for assistance. The price for those are next to nothing, and it just requires research. Calling offices, calling other offices, asking questions. It takes time and patience. But it can be done. And you paying $800 could be paying 200 through state. Even if you don't like their plan, it's better to have something than nothing.

There is nothing around me that I can work at. Wal-Mart won't hire me because I have too much experience. The other places around me close too early for them to even consider me. And I can't work around grease and certain food smells make me physically ill. There's also no starbucks near enough to me to work at.

Not that the issue is my unemployment, but no, I can't easily work at Starbucks, etc. I've applied for many retail-type positions and they take one look at my job experience and I'm not considered- they are sure i'll leave the minute a "real" job comes along. It's not worth it for them to spend the time training me. Also, many of the retail "health insurance plans" simply mean that the company offers insurance and the employee pays the full premium- the benefit is that there is a lower rate purchasing through a large employer than individually. Been there too...and the cost of participating in the plan could be more than a part-timer at minimum wage earns.

My point is that health insurance regulations and costs differ in each state. It's unfair to say "you should" or "you could" or criticize someone's priorities without knowing the issues behind the statement. Dirigo IS what the state of Maine offers for small business health plans, or residents who don't qualify for support and cannot afford a single policy. We don't qualify for the state low income programs as we have made more than the income brackets allow for the time ranges the programs work under. It is unacceptable that in a country with the wealth of the USA, with the amount of money that is put into health care, insurance, pharmaceutical companies, etc., so many people are un- or under-insured. I would gladly pay the kinds of taxes they do in the UK or Canada if it would mean getting the industry and profit-making OUT of the health care system and providing decent health care for all citizens,so people don't have to decide between health care or food or rent. It should be like it is with education- we live in a society that has determined it's beneficial to have an educated populace, so we all pay taxes to support the public education system, whether we have kids who are actually in school or not. I don't have a magical solution for how to do it, and don't think the medical business would allow it to happen in the USA anyhow, but it sure would be nice- in my opinion, of course.

Exactly! But then, there are a lot of people that don't want to pay for public schools. If it doesn't benefit them directly, they don't want to pay for it.

Oh. Also, in my experience, ratail companies d not offer any benfits to employees unless they work full time for them.

 

[Piecey]

It is all about choice. Sell the expensive car so you qualify for health insurance. Your auto insurance will be less too. Most colleges offer a plan for their students that is very inexpensive. Look to your auto insurance company or even call Blue Cross/Blue Shield. There ARE plans out there that are affordable. Again, it is choice--you don't NEED to go on vacation but you might NEED medical care.

Yes, it IS all about choice and the choices we've made make a lot more sense to us than struggling "just in case". If you're preaching how it's about choices-- why don't you stop and realize that just because you seem to think we made the wrong decision, it doesn't mean that we did.

If you can come here tomrorow-- to economically depressed West Virginia-- and find me a job that allows me to carry health insurance I'd be all for it. Unfortunately, I bet that you won't find one. I check the paper almost every Sunday and the only thing that has been in there for months is newspaper routes-- which on mountain-ish country roads in WV isn't a very economical decision to make (and still wouldn't give us health insurance)

We're not going to sell a car and let the depriciation kill us- just so that we qualify for Medicaid or w/e. That seems like a horrible way to cheat the system, and we'd rather have a reliable vehicle for whenever it snows than feel cheap.

 

[shirleyb]

Ah, but here's the thing. If the government starts covering health care, your company no longer has to cover the major portion of your insurance. I can't speak for you, but for my company they cover 90% of my premium, I'd guess that runs into the thousands of dollars per year, multiply that by my company's 350 employees and that's a tidy sum of money. The company no longer gets the tax write off for spending that on employee health care so they pay a bit more in taxes, but still keep the bulk of it. They can now afford to pay you more, reinvest it into the company and grow, or pay their shareholders a higher dividend for those companies that are corporations. Small buisness owners could keep it as profit and raise their own pay, or again, raise their employees pay or reinvest in the company to make it grow. The burden for companies would go way down, grow our economy, and raise tax revenue, helping to offset the cost to run government paid for health care.

Now, likely taxes would still have to be raised to cover the program, but with the burden of health care taken away from buisness, it shouldn't have to be raised as much. I think sometimes this gets overlooked when discussing the topic of UHC.

Does the cost of UHC concern me? Of course! I too want to know how it will affect my taxes. But having a DH with a major life long medical condition, I have to say the cost would have to be pretty dang high for me to be against it. I'd pay a lot to never have to worry about what will happen if we lose our employer paid for health insurance and we can't get or can't afford private coverage for DH.

Edited to add: It's funny you should mention Congresses health plan, because many of the UHC proposals heavily borrow ideas from their plan, if not copy it out-right.

But see this is what concerns me, and I have yet to see the answer.

Say my company pays $800 per month towards my family coverage. That's essentially part of my salary.

Now, suppose they don't have to pay that any longer, but suppose my taxes go up $500 per month to pay for everyone else's coverage. I surely doubt I'll see the $800 per month in my paycheck, but I'll be expected to pay that extra $500 per month, so essentially, I'm out $1300 per month.

 

[MushyMushy]

But see this is what concerns me, and I have yet to see the answer.

Say my company pays $800 per month towards my family coverage. That's essentially part of my salary.

Now, suppose they don't have to pay that any longer, but suppose my taxes go up $500 per month to pay for everyone else's coverage. I surely doubt I'll see the $800 per month in my paycheck, but I'll be expected to pay that extra $500 per month, so essentially, I'm out $1300 per month.

Why wouldn't you see that extra 800? That's a wild assumption on your part.

 

[shirleyb]

Why wouldn't you see that extra 800? That's a wild assumption on your part.

A WILD assumption? I can't imagine the company just saying "here's another $800" if they don't have to.

 

[lillygator]

I can't believe people actually have no insurance yet fund vacation accounts.

 

[Mom2Nick]

Why wouldn't you see that extra 800? That's a wild assumption on your part.

Isn't assuming that the company will pass on that money a wild assumption also?

 

[sarahlovesmickey]

I can't believe people actually have no insurance yet fund vacation accounts.

I am also baffled over this. To me, insurance is more important than some vacation. When I was in college, I was still under my mother's plan. Perfect. When I graduated and was not in the career I am now, I worked at Walmart and Paid a PRETTY PENNY for just mediocre insurance. BUT, my mom always taught me that Health insurance is top priority. So, even though Walmart was taking a great portion of my paycheck, atleast I was somewhat insured.

Anyway, count me in as one of those who are not in favor of UHC. My husband and I work for the State government system and have VERY good health insurance; HOWEVER, we also don't get paid the best either. BUT, when we accepted our jobs, we took into account the retirement benefits and the health care benefits and that outweighed any other job offers we received. We knew we were going to have a family and that Health care coverage is a must have. I think if we were to get UHC, we would not get the great coverage we have now.

 

[Kath2003]

Anyway, count me in as one of those who are not in favor of UHC. My husband and I work for the State government system and have VERY good health insurance; HOWEVER, we also don't get paid the best either. BUT, when we accepted our jobs, we took into account the retirement benefits and the health care benefits and that outweighed any other job offers we received. We knew we were going to have a family and that Health care coverage is a must have. I think if we were to get UHC, we would not get the great coverage we have now.

What do you get now, that you think you wouldn't get under UHC like we have in the UK?

I guess the only things I can think of are your own room guaranteed in a hospital and not having to pay the $12 excess on prescriptions (if you're eligible to pay), plus excesses for dentist work (which are very reasonable and only apply to working adults). Of course, you can still pay extra to go private in the UK...

 

[sarahlovesmickey]

What do you get now, that you think you wouldn't get under UHC like we have in the UK?

I guess the only things I can think of are your own room in a hospital and not having to pay the $12 excess on prescriptions (if you're eligible to pay), plus excesses for dentist work (which are very reasonable and only apply to working adults). Of course, you can still pay extra to go private in the UK...

Umm, I don't pay that much for my scripts and I'm sure we would fall into that "must pay" category. We have great dental coverage now. And, yeah, I do want my own hospital room. I am going to be having another baby..can't imagine sharing a room with someone else.

 

[tlens]

Umm, I don't pay that much for my scripts and I'm sure we would fall into that "must pay" category. We have great dental coverage now. And, yeah, I do want my own hospital room. I am going to be having another baby..can't imagine sharing a room with someone else.

In Canada you can get a private room...you just pay for it. My empolyer benefits gives me semi-private and the cost per day to private cost me $12.00 a day.

 

[Kath2003]

Umm, I don't pay that much for my scripts and I'm sure we would fall into that "must pay" category. We have great dental coverage now. And, yeah, I do want my own hospital room. I am going to be having another baby..can't imagine sharing a room with someone else.

You would fall into the pay for scripts category for you and your partner, but not any children you have, not if you're diabetic, not if it's contraception, not if you're exempt for any other reason etc. No excesses on children's dental care, care for pregnant women and certain other exemptions. The maximum you pay for any dental treatment, no matter how many appointment it takes, is $200.

New mothers get their own room for at least 12 hours after giving birth in most UK hospitals, if it's natural. The whole duration if you're a c-section.

What happens with your health insurance when you both retire?

 

[cteddiesgirl]

And, how many of those people travel, buy tv's, pay for internet, eat out, buy convenience foods, etc., rather than paying for insurance.

I know people who do all of these things, and then whine when there is an emergency. There are reasonable policies that cover the big things. Savings should be used to cover the small. Rather than adding to taxes. If you are willing to pay more taxes...put it toward healthcare savings instead.

I haven't been anywhere in years. You can even see in my sig when the last time I was at a Disney park was.
I still use my 13" tv that was given to me by my parents for high school graduation in 1991. I don't eat out except for very rare occasions. I did take my dad out for dinner this past sunday. I don't ever buy those "100 calorie packs" of anything. They're a complete waste. I buy big and generic when I can. And I use coupons. I don't pay for internet as my father pays for it along with the phones. My home computer is 7 years old and I have used it to sell things online. I haven't bought anything frivolous in quite a while. No cd's in years. No movies for a while. I haven't had an alcoholic drink in probably about 1.5-2 years. We don't have cable or satellite in my house. I have no cell phone, no car, no home, nothing of value to sell.
It's taken me forever to save what little money I have saved (under $500). And that's only to be used when I'm out of work or when I actually have to have something immediately. My $300 check from the government has to go towards getting an eye exam and getting new glasses. And that won't cover all of it because of how bad my eyes are.

How many more generalizations can you come up with?

The point you are missing is that people in the US have choices and often they chose to take no insurance or high deductible insurance. It doesn't have to be that way. Also, your insurance costs are just hidden in your taxes, ours aren't. You DO pay for your insurance and probably pay as much if not more then we pay for ours (we being US people in general).

As for taxes in the US, yes, many states do have taxes on food, clothing, etc. but NONE of the states have as high of sales tax rate as many of the proveniences in Canada. I am not making any broad generalizations any more then you are. I pointed out very clearly that in MN we don't have tax on any of those things. There are 13 states that don't have state income tax, that is quite a few. Many states have VERY low state income tax as well. I happen to live in one of the highest taxed states in the US and we STILL don't pay as much in taxes overall as you do. THAT is what the Canadian posters are missing. They hear how 'much' we pay for insurance when we pay as much or LESS then you do, even those with high deductible plans--you just pay your's through your taxes is all.

You're generalizing again. Not all people choose to be poor and without insurance.

And again, it comes down to you don't want to help those that are less fortunate than yourself and you don't want anything to affect you in any way.

According to you (and a few others) it's everyone else's fault that they don't have it as good as you do. So just piss on them. Make them choose between food, a roof over their head or having health insurance.

Oh. And my dad's homeowner taxes just went way up even as the value of the property went way down.
My poor dad just turned 66, is finally getting social security and still has to work like a dog standing on his feet and constantly throwing around 100 lbs of paper 55 hours a week just to make ends meet. Not to mention having to have his bosses literally screaming at him in front of everyone about things that he has had nothing to do with but yet he saves their asses constantly. Even customers would prefer to deal with him rather than deal with his bosses. Then his bosses laugh at him and say it's not their fault that he couldn't save any money even though he is actually paid under fair market value. And that's after having a heart attack just 2 years ago today.

there are always trade-offs, though. Have you tried driving thru Canada? Practically no highway system. That is, of course, their business.

They don't need as much as we do. We have a lot more population. After all, we have to make it difficult and expensive for women to get birth control. We have to have families. But that's a topic for another thread.

Um, not really--define what you mean?? I am sure everything in Canada is perfect but there are places in the US that have been his buy the current economy but then again there are places that are booming too.

$700,000 would buy a pretty typical suburban 2 story house in our area--pretty much like our house. Property taxes are about the same here as what you pay--ours are about $3900 and change this year for about the same house value. Our income tax according to the chart you posted is about 1/2 of what you pay, our sales tax is 1/2 and we don't pay tax on much of what you pay tax on. Our heath insurance is about .5% of our income. Like I said, people in the US have choices and it isn't necessarily the SYSTEM that is wrong vs the people that make bad choices. Everyone I know lives a pretty good lifestyle as well but then again most of the people I know went to college, got good jobs, have good benefits and in general made GOOD choices financially.

I would love to see the same news you are watching. Every bit of news I see is about how things are getting worse.
Very tiny pockets of the country are booming. Only because the current market or some other temporary thing has made it so. The vast majority of the US's housing market it pretty well bust. Gas and fuel prices, food, and everything else are skyrocketing. Meanwhile, the raises in income don't cover those rising prices. In fact, I make $3 less per hour now than I did 4 years ago doing the same type of work. My dad also makes less than he did 10 years ago doing the same work.
I know a few others like this too.

Unemployment is also getting worse. And that doesn't include people that have been out of work for more than a certain period of time.

Um, not really--define what you mean?? I am sure everything in Canada is perfect but there are places in the US that have been his buy the current economy but then again there are places that are booming too.

$700,000 would buy a pretty typical suburban 2 story house in our area--pretty much like our house. Property taxes are about the same here as what you pay--ours are about $3900 and change this year for about the same house value. Our income tax according to the chart you posted is about 1/2 of what you pay, our sales tax is 1/2 and we don't pay tax on much of what you pay tax on. Our heath insurance is about .5% of our income. Like I said, people in the US have choices and it isn't necessarily the SYSTEM that is wrong vs the people that make bad choices. Everyone I know lives a pretty good lifestyle as well but then again most of the people I know went to college, got good jobs, have good benefits and in general made GOOD choices financially.

$700K for a house is typical?

No wonder you think everyone can afford good insurance.
My dad's property is only worth about $150K. And it's not a crackerjack box with small ground either. Of course, Indiana does have a cheaper housing market than much of the country. But I can't believe that $700K is typical.

It's also no wonder why you think everyone can afford everything because you don't have any personal experience with people unlike yourself.

Why don't you take a year to drive around the country and get to know people outside of your perfect little social circle? And don't just go to the "better" areas.

It's a fixed percentage of what you earn above a certain amount. I'm not sure how it's distributed. The NHS also receives funding through other means, like tax on alcohol and tobacco.

Pension wise: everyone's entitled to a basic amount (about $200/week). The more of this income tax you pay, the more money you get as a pension, so yes, if you pay in more, you get more out.

Yes, it is wealth redistribution to an extent. Very very few people here have a problem with it. They know that if they were ever to need assistance, they'd get it. It's an attitude thing. The US is very much 'This is MY pile of gold, don't touch!'. The UK is more 'OK, it's my gold, but I'll share it if it means that it's better for everyone (including me if I were to ever run out of gold)'.

I know where I'd rather live, that's all.

Exactly. So many people in the US are all out mine, mine, mine! and me, me, me!
As I've said before, they may say they "care" about those less fortunate, but their other words and their actions say much differently.

There are too many people in this country who really don't care about other people. I even worry so much about my own health that I do make myself even more sick.
If we had good healthcare for everyone in this country, there wouldn't be so many people constantly sick. There wouldn't be so many people homeless. There wouldn't be so many kids without parents to raise them. There wouldn't be so many people dying early deaths. There wouldn't be so many people living off of welfare.
I do know several people that live off of welfare only so they can have healthcare when they need it.

Health insurance is not guaranteed with a job and a job is not guaranteed either. So even if you get a decent policy through a job, there's no guarantee that you will still have a job and that insurance tomorrow. If you get sick while on that insurance policy, then lose your job for whatever reason, then you can lose your insurance. The next insurance policy and/or company doesn't have to insure you for your "pre-existing" problem.

I remember when I was still under my parents employer provided policy. they changed policies, but stayed with the same company. For years I had been covered. But, this time they didn't want to insure me because I was "too short". They flat out told my mom that there must be something wrong with me because I wasn't a "normal" height. She had to fight with them for quite a while before they finally gave in. We shouldn't have to do this. People in this country shouldn't have to worry about either going to the hospital and losing their house or losing their life. We shouldn't have to worry about being able to take care of health or having a roof over our heads/being hungry.

Color me confused. I thought the OP started this thread to discuss how high the charges are for simple medical procedures, not about whether or not a person should have insurance. Granted, it is easier to handle those high charges if you have insurance, but that doesn't make them right. I agree totally that medical charges are totally out of control. After one of my surgeries, I had a sore throat from having had a tube down my throat. They brought me a box of throat lozenges. On my itemized bill, they charged me $20 for that box of lozenges. I did question it, but was told that was what they charged. That's crazy. Just because they can, doesn't make it right.

This thread has gone a totally different direction than what I believe the OP intended...as it always does on anything related to health care.

Yes. The price of healthcare is out of control. I also happen to believe that part of the reason is due to greed on the healthcare end and part of it is due to the fact that so many people (like me unfortunately) don't/can't pay for the services. If we had UHC, I believe much of those prices would come slightly down as the doctors and hospitals would be guaranteed payment.

There are two elements to this. One is "cost of coverage" and the other is "quality of coverage".

IIRC, it cost me (out of my paycheck) about $360 a month to cover myself and my wife. That includes dental and glasses. My employer covers the difference. I'm not really sure what that is, I'd have to look it up. Suppose UHC costs 8 percent. My wife doesn't have healthcare taken out of her pay right now. So if UHC takes 8 percent of our combined income, that's way more than I currently pay. But no one can come up with a hard number as to what UHC (or NHC) would cost ME (and yes, the cost DOES concern me, if it doesn't concern others, that's fine). All I know is, if the government (the US) said it's gonna cost "$X" (or X percent in taxes or where ever they get the money from), it's guaranteed that it's gonna cost double or triple once implemented. That's what happened to the Medicare part-D prescription drug program.

Congress is great for using healthcare as a "wedge" issue. We should all have the same healthcare and pension plan they have. They don't have to deal with the issues that working families do.

So the company spends part of it's money subsidizing your healthcare. If they didn't have to do that, then they could give you a raise. Thereby not costing you anymore in healthcare.

But see this is what concerns me, and I have yet to see the answer.

Say my company pays $800 per month towards my family coverage. That's essentially part of my salary.

Now, suppose they don't have to pay that any longer, but suppose my taxes go up $500 per month to pay for everyone else's coverage. I surely doubt I'll see the $800 per month in my paycheck, but I'll be expected to pay that extra $500 per month, so essentially, I'm out $1300 per month.

That's why it should be included in any UHC law that the difference they no longer have to pay for your insurance should go to the employer.

That's easily settled. The company was already volunteering to give you this benfit, so why would they care about keeping the money? Unless of course they were cheating the system. Which I do believe some companies do.

Anyway, count me in as one of those who are not in favor of UHC. My husband and I work for the State government system and have VERY good health insurance; HOWEVER, we also don't get paid the best either. BUT, when we accepted our jobs, we took into account the retirement benefits and the health care benefits and that outweighed any other job offers we received. We knew we were going to have a family and that Health care coverage is a must have. I think if we were to get UHC, we would not get the great coverage we have now.

You simply don't know for certain that this is the truth. Why should the quality of healthcare go down?

I'm just now thinking of a story a saw a few months ago on GMA. A woman who bled to death on the floor of an emergency room because she was refused any help. Her family running around trying to get anyone to help the poor woman and being completely ignored. So this is the "great" care we all receive?

 

[sarahlovesmickey]

You would fall into the pay for scripts category for you and your partner, but not any children you have, not if you're diabetic, not if it's contraception, not if you're exempt for any other reason etc. No excesses on children's dental care, care for pregnant women and certain other exemptions. The maximum you pay for any dental treatment, no matter how many appointment it takes, is $200.

New mothers get their own room for at least 12 hours after giving birth in most UK hospitals, if it's natural. The whole duration if you're a c-section.

What happens with your health insurance when you both retire?

If we stay employed with the State long enough, we get it as part of our retirement package.

 

[jodifla]

I am also baffled over this. To me, insurance is more important than some vacation. When I was in college, I was still under my mother's plan. Perfect. When I graduated and was not in the career I am now, I worked at Walmart and Paid a PRETTY PENNY for just mediocre insurance. BUT, my mom always taught me that Health insurance is top priority. So, even though Walmart was taking a great portion of my paycheck, atleast I was somewhat insured.

Anyway, count me in as one of those who are not in favor of UHC. My husband and I work for the State government system and have VERY good health insurance; HOWEVER, we also don't get paid the best either. BUT, when we accepted our jobs, we took into account the retirement benefits and the health care benefits and that outweighed any other job offers we received. We knew we were going to have a family and that Health care coverage is a must have. I think if we were to get UHC, we would not get the great coverage we have now.

Two points:

One, all the people of your state PAY FOR YOUR HEALTH CARE! And yet, you don't want to extend the courtesy to the rest of the country.

Two, if you save $50 a month for your vacation fund, but insurance would costs you $500 a month, how can you POSSIBLY relate the two??