Recommended Posts
QuoteQuote
To everyone that says this, I have to ask, when you are eligible, will you take social security and Medicare? Both are Socialist programs, however I have yet to find someone who plans on sending the check back, or keeping their own full private health care when they are eligible.
Social Security largely isn't a socialist program. For practical purposes it's mostly a mandatory retirement savings program with an atrocious rate of return, with the average earning male born after 1966 getting a .5% inflation adjusted rate of return.
....
For higher income earners Medicare is more like a pre-paid health plan. You pay thousands of dollars a year as a younger person and get relatively affordable care as an old person.
Yep. Why wouldn't one collect the benefits they've been paying into? Until recently, the 12.4% contributed in my name to SS exceeded my retirement savings. Yet even if I work the full 35 or 40 years that count, it will pay back $1800/month (and then subtract a minumum of 20% when the program starts falling down). Similarly, my medicare contributions cost more than Kaiser would, though less than my PPO.
QuoteQuoteMost people have good health insurance in the present day. Even if you acknowledge that the system appears to be collapsing in the next decade or two, trading what we have now for what we see in 'universal health care' nations is not attractive. Right now you can buy good health care - will that become false in the future?
I (as do a lot of my co workers) have an HSA plan that says I need to spend $1,500 out of pocket before they will cover anything. I have not been to see a doctor in over 8 years because of this. Just today, I had a conversation with one of my co-workers who is planning on having as many MRIs/expensive tests she can have this year as she has already spent her $1,500 and now everything else is covered, so why not have the tests done.....
Is this what they are saying is a "good plan"? Avoid preventative care until you need something done, and then spend every dime you can in that year, because it will be several years until you and afford the $1,500 for the initial visit (and subsequent overspending)....
Doesn't sound like a good plan to me.....
Mark Klingelhoefer
It's not. The HSA plan was Bush's dodge on the issue. Conceptually it would be good, but in practice pretty much a dreadful failure.
It's also not the norm for W2 employees, much more common for 1099s. My deductible has been 250 or 500. My out of pocket cost is now ~140 pretax. $10 copay. $2k max/year. So as I said, why would it be surprising that a majority don't want to change to something different and almost certainly slightly worse?
Those who suffer are those who get nailed by preexisting conditions coupled with job loss. Those who have to pay for COBRA with taxable money (yes, the current stimulus stuff fixes that, but it didn't the last time around for me). All real issues with the system, but people that represent a minority of the population, and even smaller minority of voters.
Skyrad 0
Lucius Annaeus Seneca
tkhayes 348
And yes and private/public system can and could work just fine.
Quote
ETA: It also amazes me that there are people that complain about having to pay a $5 co-pay for office visits. Just goes to show the illogical mentality of some.
$5 co-pay? I haven't seen that in a couple of decades. If I go to the doc it's either $35 or $45, and possibly both if I'm there for an x-ray. And when we have to take my youngest to the children's hospital there are two $35 co-pays, one for the facility and one for the Dr.
And woe be the family who makes an appointment with the wrong branch of the same hospital (after being referred by the right branch) as we'll get billed for the full amount of the visit, after the two co-pays of course.
IMO, a single payer system would eliminate most of the nonsense and expense listed above.
QuoteQuote
ETA: It also amazes me that there are people that complain about having to pay a $5 co-pay for office visits. Just goes to show the illogical mentality of some.
$5 co-pay? I haven't seen that in a couple of decades. If I go to the doc it's either $35 or $45, and possibly both if I'm there for an x-ray. And when we have to take my youngest to the children's hospital there are two $35 co-pays, one for the facility and one for the Dr.
And woe be the family who makes an appointment with the wrong branch of the same hospital (after being referred by the right branch) as we'll get billed for the full amount of the visit, after the two co-pays of course.
IMO, a single payer system would eliminate most of the nonsense and expense listed above.
I still see $5 co-pays daily at my practice.
----Disclaimer: I don't know shit about skydiving.----
Quote
I still see $5 co-pays daily at my practice.
I guess the ~$14K per year that my employer and I pay to Anthem isn't enough to get that nice of a plan.
DJL 235
QuoteHealthcare issues creates more debate (anger) than invading and making war on false premises! God help you all!
We're used to not giving a shit until well after the fact. I'm less pissed at the people who fabricated that WMD BS than I am at the people and their elected officials who went along with it. There was not doubt that the premise was bullshit; the so called proof was never provided to the people, the politicians, or the military leadership. Everyone was given the line that it was too much of a secret to share and they ate it.
QuoteQuote
I still see $5 co-pays daily at my practice.
I guess the ~$14K per year that my employer and I pay to Anthem isn't enough to get that nice of a plan.
Group size and state have a lot to do with it.
$6000 for an individual/$12,000 for a couple/$18,000 for a family was enough to get a 0-deductible, 0 co-pay plan when I was at Microsoft in Washington State in 2006.
In practice you may be better off with a higher co-pay/deductible plan with the difference going into a use-it-or-loose-it flexible spending account. At my current company we can select among a number of options offered by our Professional Employer Organization, and at one point putting the price difference between the $500 deductible and $1000 deductible plan into an FSA effectively made it zero.
QuoteQuoteQuote
I still see $5 co-pays daily at my practice.
I guess the ~$14K per year that my employer and I pay to Anthem isn't enough to get that nice of a plan.
Group size and state have a lot to do with it.
$6000 for an individual/$12,000 for a couple/$18,000 for a family was enough to get a 0-deductible, 0 co-pay plan when I was at Microsoft in Washington State in 2006.
In practice you may be better off with a higher co-pay/deductible plan with the difference going into a use-it-or-loose-it flexible spending account. At my current company we can select among a number of options offered by our Professional Employer Organization, and at one point putting the price difference between the $500 deductible and $1000 deductible plan into an FSA effectively made it zero.
I'm a Virginia State employee so the group is pretty large. My wife has a flex spending account through her work at the hospital. Unfortunately the company which manages that account apparently has a policy of deny/lock down account until additional paperwork arrives. We use a card for the service yet they continually ask us to provide receipts for receipts that they already have. It's really quite annoying to have to constantly do battle to get your money.
If you ask just about anyone what it is that they don't like about their health care I'm willing to bet it's the administrative component.
kallend 2,151
QuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteAs a non american i haven't been exposed to as much of the internal debate on the universal Healthcare bill as some of you. Coming form a country where healthcare is free at the poiunt of care for all I find it difficult to understand why anyone would want to restrict it from those in need who don't have money. So why are you against universal healthcare?
We have a 1.4T deficit last year, and 1T+ deficit this year. This conversion won't be cheap either.
What do you think of the CBO cost estimate?
Off by a factor of 3X, at a minimum.
On what data you you base this? I'd be interested in your analysis.
The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.
kallend 2,151
QuoteQuoteQuote
ETA: It also amazes me that there are people that complain about having to pay a $5 co-pay for office visits. Just goes to show the illogical mentality of some.
$5 co-pay? I haven't seen that in a couple of decades. If I go to the doc it's either $35 or $45, and possibly both if I'm there for an x-ray. And when we have to take my youngest to the children's hospital there are two $35 co-pays, one for the facility and one for the Dr.
And woe be the family who makes an appointment with the wrong branch of the same hospital (after being referred by the right branch) as we'll get billed for the full amount of the visit, after the two co-pays of course.
IMO, a single payer system would eliminate most of the nonsense and expense listed above.
I still see $5 co-pays daily at my practice.
My co-pay went up by 33% this year, but my premiums only increased 15% so I guess I lucked out.
The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.
pirana 0
QuoteTo everyone that says this, I have to ask, when you are eligible, will you take social security and Medicare? Both are Socialist programs, however I have yet to find someone who plans on sending the check back, or keeping their own full private health care when they are eligible.
If I had been given the opportunity to invest privately instead of paying into SS; I'd have done it in a NY minute. But since I was forced to pay in, damn straight I'm taking the check.
And if I'd have been allowed to put that money in my 401K along with my own personal savings - I'd be genuinely comfortably retired today. But then someone like dreamdancer would come along and expect me to give them my savings - just cuz.
kallend 2,151
QuoteQuoteHealthcare issues creates more debate (anger) than invading and making war on false premises! God help you all!
We're used to not giving a shit until well after the fact. I'm less pissed at the people who fabricated that WMD BS than I am at the people and their elected officials who went along with it. There was not doubt that the premise was bullshit; the so called proof was never provided to the people, the politicians, or the military leadership. Everyone was given the line that it was too much of a secret to share and they ate it.
Like THIS GUY?
But Here's someone that didn't buy it.
The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.
QuoteQuoteQuoteHealthcare issues creates more debate (anger) than invading and making war on false premises! God help you all!
We're used to not giving a shit until well after the fact. I'm less pissed at the people who fabricated that WMD BS than I am at the people and their elected officials who went along with it. There was not doubt that the premise was bullshit; the so called proof was never provided to the people, the politicians, or the military leadership. Everyone was given the line that it was too much of a secret to share and they ate it.
Like THIS GUY?
I gotta admit, I'm fairly well convinced that the French do indeed have WMDs.
Blues,
Dave
(drink Mountain Dew)
rehmwa 2
QuoteIf I had been given the opportunity to invest privately instead of paying into SS; I'd have done it in a NY minute. But since I was forced to pay in, damn straight I'm taking the check.
And if I'd have been allowed to put that money in my 401K along with my own personal savings - I'd be genuinely comfortably retired today. But then someone like dreamdancer would come along and expect me to give them my savings - just cuz.
this is pretty much my position too
but don't worry - the congress stays on point, you can give up your 401K too
...
Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants
Postes r made from an iPad or iPhone. Spelling and gramhair mistakes guaranteed move along,
QuoteNot to get off subject, but if you had WMD and lived in basically a desert that was 167400 square miles, and due to political bs and the media you were tipped off by tv stations, and contacted many times about WMD politically, and stalled for months, that you could not hide, transport, destroy it before and "inspector" arrives???
We're talking about WMD's, I mean WMD programs, I mean WMD program related activities. Those would leave a pretty big fingerprint. We're not talking about flushing a joint when you hear your mom coming up the stairs.
DJL 235
QuoteQuoteQuoteHealthcare issues creates more debate (anger) than invading and making war on false premises! God help you all!
We're used to not giving a shit until well after the fact. I'm less pissed at the people who fabricated that WMD BS than I am at the people and their elected officials who went along with it. There was not doubt that the premise was bullshit; the so called proof was never provided to the people, the politicians, or the military leadership. Everyone was given the line that it was too much of a secret to share and they ate it.
Like THIS GUY?
But Here's someone that didn't buy it.
Um...I'm not sure you caught the sarcasm coating that post like caramel on a candy apple. You replied that to post with: "Just like we KNOW that Nixon was not a crook, that there were no US forces in Cambodia, that there would be "no new taxes", and that no there was no US involvement between Iran and the Contras.
Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me. "
So just to be sure, you're kidding, right?
QuoteQuote
What do you think of the CBO cost estimate?
I'll tell you what I think.
The CBO cost estimate was based on the bill as passed and not on the bill as they state it will be after reconciliation. As it is, I undertstand that the bill seeks to limit compensation to physicians. That likely won't happen. Meaning that the the cost estimates are on the low end. Other factors are likely included that will be increased.
Second, the funding really doesn't kick in for a few years. So the bill will cost $900 billion over ten years? That doesn't sound too bad until one thinks, "$800 billion of that is in the last five years." It'll therefore be probably 3-5 trillion in years 11-20.
Third - governments already spend over a trillion per year on healthcare. Will this bill actually take away that spending? Or add to it.
Fourth - does is actually redfuce the deficit? No. It just reduces the INCREASE in the deficit. In governmentspeak, when something is expected to be a trillion dollar deficit, but only is a 900 billion deficit, they call that "deficit reduction." They cheer themselves for spending ony $900 bilion they don't have versus $1 trillion.
Yay.
So, there are my problems with it. That's just getting started.
Jerry .... I want to know what your legal thoughts are on the issue. Not necessarily on the basis of the 10th but on the basis of how this was passed. Does the SC have any grounds to over turn the bill based on how it was passed? Without the needed majority every other bill needs?
Muff Brother #4382 Dudeist Skydiver #000
www.fundraiseadventure.com
Amazon 7
QuoteNot to get off subject, but if you had WMD and lived in basically a desert that was 167400 square miles, and due to political bs and the media you were tipped off by tv stations, and contacted many times about WMD politically, and stalled for months, that you could not hide, transport, destroy it before and "inspector" arrives???
OMG ITS A SIGN OF ARMEGEDDON FOR SURE.. IT'S THE END OF THE WORLD AS WE KNOW IT
Social Security largely isn't a socialist program. For practical purposes it's mostly a mandatory retirement savings program with an atrocious rate of return, with the average earning male born after 1966 getting a .5% inflation adjusted rate of return.
The last time I looked I'd have to outlast my statistically expected lifespan by five years just to break 0% assuming benefits increase at least as fast as inflation and the rate + wage cap grow no faster. If the money was invested to yield just 3% (with the stock market good for 7% after inflation) I could get 4X the benefit over the same 15 years, 2X until I died at 100, or 30% more forever with 1.5M in today's dollars going to my heirs.
For higher income earners Medicare is more like a pre-paid health plan. You pay thousands of dollars a year as a younger person and get relatively affordable care as an old person.
Share this post
Link to post
Share on other sites