Are people really going to get help paying for their Health Insurance?

[esmith]

So you think a guy "earning" $10 an hour should pay the same as someone making $50 an hour our ? And pay the same amount for the same illness?

Every see how Medicare Part B works? Everyone pays the same premium and pays the same amount for the same illness, yet everyone's Social Security payment is deducted for the premium , yet everyone's Social Security is not the same. So, what is your answer to that?

 

[Reverend Rick]

Every see how Medicare Part B works? Everyone pays the same premium and pays the same amount for the same illness, yet everyone's Social Security payment is deducted for the premium , yet everyone's Social Security is not the same. So, what is your answer to that?

They don't have one it would seem. :no:

 

[Copernicus]

We're gonnna have a long & bumpy road towards single payer, eh?

Perhaps so, but that is largely because there is so much ideologically-motivated resistance to it. Vermont is using the ACA as a bridge to a single-payer system. It can be done, if there is a political will to do it. Right now, the ACA is under heavy partisan attack, so it is not going to go as smoothly as it should. Nevertheless, it will go forward. Hopefully, people will see that there is a better way to run a national health care system.

Every see how Medicare Part B works? Everyone pays the same premium and pays the same amount for the same illness, yet everyone's Social Security payment is deducted for the premium , yet everyone's Social Security is not the same. So, what is your answer to that?

Actually, not everyone does pay the same amount, but most do. The point of insurance is not to guarantee that everyone gets exactly the same value out it that they put in. Some will use the benefits more than others. Some will pay in more than others. Right now, it is funded by an extremely regressive tax, but there have been attempts to make it more progressive.

 

[esmith]

Perhaps so, but that is largely because there is so much ideologically-motivated resistance to it. Vermont is using the ACA as a bridge to a single-payer system. It can be done, if there is a political will to do it. Right now, the ACA is under heavy partisan attack, so it is not going to go as smoothly as it should. Nevertheless, it will go forward. Hopefully, people will see that there is a better way to run a national health care system.


Actually, not everyone does pay the same amount, but most do. The point of insurance is not to guarantee that everyone gets exactly the same value out it that they put in. Some will use the benefits more than others. Some will pay in more than others. Right now, it is funded by an extremely regressive tax, but there have been attempts to make it more progressive.

Part B premium is $104.90. In 2013, the threshold is $85,000 for single filers or married couples who file separately and $170,000 for couples who file jointly, based on 2011 tax returns.

So, how do you propose to change the FICA taxes to make it "progressive"?

 

[Copernicus]

Part B premium is $104.90. In 2013, the threshold is $85,000 for single filers or married couples who file separately and $170,000 for couples who file jointly, based on 2011 tax returns.

So, how do you propose to change the FICA taxes to make it "progressive"?

On SS or Medicare? For SS, there are many ways to do it, the best known template being the progressive marginal rate approach. But one could simply raise the cap on annual earnings, and I think that that is what is being proposed by Democrats. Before I retired, I tended to have income that exceeded the cap and wasn't taxed. I have no specific proposal for fixing Medicare, but we have some time before we really need to alter either program. SS is solvent atm and shows little sign of going into the red, unless, of course, politicians monkey with it further. The ACA did make some minor improvements in Part D, most notably making it possible to buy prescription drugs at below retail. Republicans forced the fund to pay the inflated retail rates, and that helped to destabilize the program, which some of us think was intentional on their part. In any case, it was a massive, unjustifiable giveaway to major pharmaceutical corporations.