Wow....

[Tyler's Dad]

I agree that the US healthcare is flawed mainly because of the sole purpose of insurance companies is profit. That I do not disagree with.

What I do disagree with is that my/our taxes should go up to help others again. I pay high taxes now and I do not want to pay even higher taxes just so certain (not all) people can abuse the system even more.

5 years down the road we will be in the same situation where we can raise taxes to help the less fortunate and give more money to the people that abuse the system.

I have very good healthcare because my wife is a teacher and I am very greatful for that.

there are a lot of things that need to be addressed before even considering changing the healthcare benefits. Malpractice lawsuits for one. There are lawyers advertising on TV now saying "You can sue if you child has cerebral palsey." This is a huge reason why healthcare is so expesive. The malpractice insurance is outrageously expensive and that cost gets passed directly to the patients. I would never want to be a doctor because I could be sued so many times just because people are greedy.

I posted the statistics on this for another thread on this topic. Actual premiums are not actually effected much at all by the price of malpractice insurance. It really is a very small percentage of the total cost.

 

[rgf207]

I have a question for those of you against paying for every citizen to receive health care.

I can assume then that you are not going to accept your social security check when the time comes (or if it already has) because you did not pay that entire amount that went into it.

In fact younger Americans will be footing the bill for it, and why should they have to make up the difference?

I am a younger american. I am 27 years old and most likely I will not receive Social Security since it most likely will not be available when I reach the age. That is why I am putting the maximum in my 401K so I will have something to pay for my healthcare and living when I reach that age.

 

[becka]

Those of us who are paying for health insurance now may have our taxes increase with UHC but we also will stop paying premiums. The tax increase may be higher than the premiums for many (although many would also see their take home pay increase with tax increases less than their monthly premiums) but I think that in the end it will actually cost less as a taxpayer to give preventive care to the millions who currently do not have health insurance.

There will always be people willing to work the system but it is not like UHC is going to be handing checks to people who don't have insurance that they can use on their luxury car lease payments. These people will simply be able to go to the doctor for check ups and when they are sick - they will not be making money on the deal. How is that a bad thing? How are you worried that people will abuse the system? Do you think they will go to the doctor too much?

We all know that the healthcare system in the US is broken and no amount of CPR is going to bring it back to life. Government run programs do work in other countries and as far as I am concerned it can't get much worse so let them have a shot at it. Something has to be done and there is no perfect solution. No plan is going to make 100% of the people in this country happy but that is also true for every other item that the federal government spends our tax dollars on.

 

[ducklite]

I have a question for those of you against paying for every citizen to receive health care.

I can assume then that you are not going to accept your social security check when the time comes (or if it already has) because you did not pay that entire amount that went into it.

In fact younger Americans will be footing the bill for it, and why should they have to make up the difference?

I do not believe that I will ever get back the money I've paid into social security. I'm planning my retirement as if I was not getting social security. Even if I do get it, I am pretty confident that the payments will be miniscule and not ever begin to match what I've paid in over the years--let alone any interest I could have collected on my money.

In fact what I think is going to happen is means testing, so that those who have saved and scrimped and funded retirement accounts will be deemed as not needing social security, and those who have lived frivolously and/or paid very little into the system and have no savings will ultimately receive far more than they paid in.

Anne

 

[rgf207]

I posted the statistics on this for another thread on this topic. Actual premiums are not actually effected much at all by the price of malpractice insurance. It really is a very small percentage of the total cost.

Thank you for pointing that out

 

[Crankyshank]

I have a question for those of you against paying for every citizen to receive health care.

I can assume then that you are not going to accept your social security check when the time comes (or if it already has) because you did not pay that entire amount that went into it.

In fact younger Americans will be footing the bill for it, and why should they have to make up the difference?

The Social Security comparison isn't valid for my generation (Gen X) because we were raised to believe that SS is something we will pay into and never benefit from.

 

[tonilea]

We pay between 10 and 15 percent of our income to insurance ($4500 per year). There are alot of people who say they can't afford insurance, but they can drive new cars. What is really more important?

I don't know what the answer is, but I can't imagine the govenment being in charge of my health. Heck, they can't even balance the budget!

 

[hydster]

Your story is THE NORMAL for this country. There are many more of YOU than all these wonderful tax paying HARD workers.

I have news for those Upstanding Tax paying HARD workers....Within a snap of a finger "POOF", (because some CEO wants a higher 1% profit increase this quarter so he can get his 4 million dollar bonus)....Tommorrow you can have it ALL taken away from you...and nuttin you can do about it!

I know there are many more of us out there and it stinks! We sent my DH to school, got him a degree, got him certified. He had a good job until one day the CEO *who incidentally WAS promised a 4 million dollar bonus* shipped all the jobs he could find to India.

There wasn't a damn thing we could do about it and it forced us to take the first job we could get in order to keep our house and not go on any government assistance.

There are far too many people out there who do not think this will happen to them.*We were one of them* I hope it doesn't but it IS becoming the new reality and when and if it occurs to one of them will they in turn want help to get health care for themselves and their families?? You bet your bippy they will and the only reason they will is because it finally hit THEM just like it hit us!

 

[Tyler's Dad]

That 25 year old single mother who is living in section 8 housing and getting food stamps has no reason to not work for $8 an hour at McDonalds. Her childcare will also be subsidized. She might not be any better off financially, but she's not going to be worse off. She'll be paying into the system and as long as she works hard she'll ahve a very big chance to become a member of management.

BTW--I was a 26 year old single mom without a college degree. I got no child support, and I worked two jobs to make ends meet. I never asked for or took a dime of government or charity money. I have several acquaintances who are my age and had their children at about the same point in time who chose to take the easy route and sit home collecting welfare--even after thier kids were in school full time and even after the state paid for more than one job training program for them. While I was making $35 too much a year to qualify for an EIC, they were watching soap operas, sleeping late, and living pretty comfortable lives.

Anne

Again though, that is a small sampling. Your personal experiences do not mean that everyone is like this. To say that the number of people abusing the system far exceeds the number that need these programs is comical as well as sad. Again, people who are on welfare do not live the cozy lives people seem to think they do. It is not a vacation.

 

[Todd&Copper]

Honestly, I don't want my taxes to be raised for this. I would like to see my current tax dollars redistributed to help with healthcare.

But if I have to pay any more taxes, *I'll* be the one needing assistance, and that's not fair.

ITA!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

[ducklite]

Those of us who are paying for health insurance now may have our taxes increase with UHC but we also will stop paying premiums.

For many of us there will be a decrease in services. Will the government system cover vision? Dental? Prescriptions? My guess is that in the long run I will pay more in taxes, have to wait longer to get an appointment, and see the level of service I currently receive decrease. That's not something I want to live with.

Why can't the government offer an "opt-in" plan where anyone can buy basic health insurance through the government in a manner that would not cost taxpayers anything more but would still offer affordable premiums. If they tossed all of the current medicare/medicaid recipients into the pot it might work. I think that they could offer two or three levels--kind of like medicare currently does--and it might be able to work to give at least some level of insurance to anyone who wanted it--without forcing those who currently have policies they are happy with to lose that coverage.

Anne

 

[ducklite]

I know there are many more of us out there and it stinks! We sent my DH to school, got him a degree, got him certified. He had a good job until one day the CEO *who incidentally WAS promised a 4 million dollar bonus* shipped all the jobs he could find to India.

There wasn't a damn thing we could do about it and it forced us to take the first job we could get in order to keep our house and not go on any government assistance.

There are far too many people out there who do not think this will happen to them.*We were one of them* I hope it doesn't but it IS becoming the new reality and when and if it occurs to one of them will they in turn want help to get health care for themselves and their families?? You bet your bippy they will and the only reason they will is because it finally hit THEM just like it hit us!

I'm confused. Wasn't COBRA available to you?

Anne

 

[CheshireVal]

It really isn't all that black and white......there is a lot of gray and personally I wish my taxes that were funding this stupid *** war in Iraq were helping ME and MY family instead of rebuilding a nation we helped rip apart for nothing except to satisfy a power hungry politician who wants to take over the world one country at a time.

My thoughts exactly!

 

[PghLybrt]

I do not believe that I will ever get back the money I've paid into social security. I'm planning my retirement as if I was not getting social security. Even if I do get it, I am pretty confident that the payments will be miniscule and not ever begin to match what I've paid in over the years--let alone any interest I could have collected on my money.

In fact what I think is going to happen is means testing, so that those who have saved and scrimped and funded retirement accounts will be deemed as not needing social security, and those who have lived frivolously and/or paid very little into the system and have no savings will ultimately receive far more than they paid in.

Anne

So to answer the question then you will be sending your check back, right?

And as to the subsided daycare. My sister in law spend 600 a week on day care (so that the children are watched after school) and she receives 125 a week in subsidy.

 

[Tyler's Dad]

For many of us there will be a decrease in services. Will the government system cover vision? Dental? Prescriptions? My guess is that in the long run I will pay more in taxes, have to wait longer to get an appointment, and see the level of service I currently receive decrease. That's not something I want to live with.

Why can't the government offer an "opt-in" plan where anyone can buy basic health insurance through the government in a manner that would not cost taxpayers anything more but would still offer affordable premiums. If they tossed all of the current medicare/medicaid recipients into the pot it might work. I think that they could offer two or three levels--kind of like medicare currently does--and it might be able to work to give at least some level of insurance to anyone who wanted it--without forcing those who currently have policies they are happy with to lose that coverage.

Anne

This is the problem with arguing about this. People don't actually read the proposals being put out there. Clinton's proposal says people WILL have the option to stay with what they have. If you like your insurance, you keep it and your company will be given tax breaks for offering such good insurance. Nobody will be forced into anything. Obama's was the same. Nobody wants to tell you what you can or can't do, they just want everyone to have access to what you are so happy with.

 

[rabx5]

I'm confused. Wasn't COBRA available to you?

Anne

I was wondering the same thing

 

[hydster]

I'm confused. Wasn't COBRA available to you?

Anne

Yes it was available to us at a cost to us per MONTH of $617 *we had to pay both our "share" and the share the company paid to keep our "sub par" insurance we had from the previous job. It had a $5000 deductible or $10,000 per family unit until they paid and then it was 50/50 coverage. The prescription benefit didn't kick in until $250 deductible or $500 family was reached and that was 60/40.

We only paid 1/2 of that when DH was employed with them so it didn't hurt as bad but take 617 x 12 = 7404 per year. Then add in the $5000 I'd have to pay before they kicked in any extra cost and my health insurance went to $12404 per year to get 50/50 medical coverage through the insurance company.

Something needs to be done in this country for the working poor as well as the poor poor! If you see our salary on paper we look pretty great.....add stuff like this in and................

 

[Fitswimmer]

This is the problem with arguing about this. People don't actually read the proposals being put out there. Clinton's proposal says people WILL have the option to stay with what they have. If you like your insurance, you keep it and your company will be given tax breaks for offering such good insurance. Nobody will be forced into anything. Obama's was the same. Nobody wants to tell you what you can or can't do, they just want everyone to have access to what you are so happy with.

You beat me to it. Clinton's new plan fixed the flaw in her first one-those of us that have good insurance will be able to go on just as we are-only our companies will reap a benefit! I'm not naive enough to think that we will see any of that tax cut in our salaries-after all the CEO has to gas up that Mercedes-but I'm happy just to keep what I have.

 

[Tyler's Dad]

I was wondering the same thing

Do you know how expensive COBRA is?

 

[wvjules]

For many of us there will be a decrease in services. Will the government system cover vision? Dental? Prescriptions? My guess is that in the long run I will pay more in taxes, have to wait longer to get an appointment, and see the level of service I currently receive decrease. That's not something I want to live with.

Anne

Its posts like these that prompted the selfish remark. "My service will decrease and I'm more important that you." Wouldn't you be willing to wait a week or two longer for an appointment if it meant that the formerly uninsured woman down the street got preventative care and her cancer was caught/treated early?