House Democrat Health Plan

[T-Dawg]

This is the point. If you make enough, you can afford health care.

I think his point was that the median income number was too high to represent people such as himself.

So, is the problem health care is too high, or is it many folks are under the medium income?

Both.

I say people need to become more productive so they can afford the basics in life not just have them handed out to everyone.

Rick, what do you do for a living?

If any point was made here in this thread, it would be easier to give you a house or a car than health care.

Disagreed. Houses and cars are products that are sold to people for profit (although it's debatable that they should be). Healthcare is a RIGHT that all people should be entitled to.

 

[Falvlun]

Most folks who make a medium income only have one job. They could always do better. Work on that Masters or Doctorate. Take on an evening or weekend job.

There's gotta to be a better way to live then working like a dog-- which seems to be your only suggestion-- just to be able to afford basic necessities.

I value hard work. I value being a productive member of society. But I also value being able to go on a walk with my dog everyday.

 

[Reverend Rick]

There's gotta to be a better way to live then working like a dog-- which seems to be your only suggestion-- just to be able to afford basic necessities.

I value hard work. I value being a productive member of society. But I also value being able to go on a walk with my dog everyday.

With Time Management, All Things Are Possible.

 

[Reverend Rick]

Rick, what do you do for a living?

I twist wires together.

Health care is a RIGHT that all people should be entitled to.

"Is" and "should" in the same sentence?

Health care is a privilege not a right unless your life is in imminent danger.

 

[Falvlun]

With Time Management, All Things Are Possible.

???

You have stated that anyone who can't afford health care should get an evening and/or a weekend job, and should be pursuing some kind of higher education. What time is left to be managed?

 

[Magic Man]

It may be a tight budget, but I know people who do more for less. For one, many people in my state would think 1300 a month is a bit steep for a house payment. My son put some money down on his house and has a 1,000.00 payment including escrow.

OK, great. So, factor in a $1,000 house payment. That still makes a pretty tight budget.

I may have it wrong, perhaps many people spend too much money on clothes and eating out.

Huh?

The big thing you are missing is, being responsible and self reliant is priceless. Who told you life would be easy?

The big thing you're missing is we're talking about health care. We're not talking about a luxury. We're not talking about having extra. We're talking about the basics. Should poor areas of town not have police or fire departments either? Should they not have running water or roads or decent schools either? Health care is no different than any of those things. They are all things that every person should have access to, no matter how much money they make.

No, life isn't easy, but some people are as responsible and self-reliant as possible, and yet still can't afford health care. That's what you're missing.

Don't you see how making ends meet and providing for your family builds character? It makes you appreciate the finer things in life when you finally climb up into the upper half of wage earners.

That's assuming you can climb that high. Many people can't, which is why there is half of the country below that line. Besides, who said anything about making ends meet not building character? You really love your distractions and strawmen, don't you?

Most folks who make a medium income only have one job. They could always do better. Work on that Masters or Doctorate. Take on an evening or weekend job.

First, it's called the median income, unless you mean the average income. Second, that's some fine detective work you've done. It's too bad it's completely wrong. I bet a good 50% of those people below that median income work more than one job, and I bet at least that many work as hard as you do or harder. Getting a degree doesn't guarantee anything these days. Plus, it's kind of hard to do that when you're taking care of 2 kids by yourself (or even with a spouse) and working two jobs.

You would be amazed at the amount of money you save when you work more and play less.

I'm really not sure how to get this through your thick skull. A lot of people aren't poor because they waste too much money. A lot of people who can't afford health care can't not afford it because they waste too much money. I can go through the finances with you again, if you'd like. Here:

Median income: $50,740
After 15% taxes taken out: $43,129 or about $3,590 a month

Mortgage: $1,000 (which around here would buy you almost nothing)
Car insurance: $100
Gas: $200
Gas and Electric: $200
Groceries: $300
Health insurance: $1,500
Grand total: $3,300

That leaves $290 after bare minimum expenses. That's not eating out at all, or at the very least not more than once a month, if even that. That's also not including a car payment, although at some point you have to buy the car, even if you pay it off and don't have a payment for a few years. And, no, you don't need a car, but then you pay that gas and insurance money in whatever public transportation you use.

This also assumes you're doing nothing but eating at home and reading books from the library. You don't have a TV, or a computer or even a phone of any kind. And this only leaves you $290 a month. That $290 goes towards any repairs you need, any clothes you need, any unforeseen problems that come up, etc. $290 doesn't get you much these days.

Please check out reality some time, will ya?

 

[Magic Man]

This is the point. If you make enough, you can afford health care.

Exactly, and therein lies the problem. If "making enough" meant making minimum wage full-time, that would be one thing. The problem is that "making enough" means making more than twice minimum wage, and many times it means making more than 3 or four times minimum wage.

So, is the problem health care is too high, or is it many folks are under the medium income?

That's easy, health care's too high. And many folks aren't under the median income, half are. That's why it's the median income. Unless you mean the average income, which would be very different.

I say people need to become more productive so they can afford the basics in life not just have them handed out to everyone.

I say you don't seem to understand how productive most people are. I say you need to be educated about people who make less than $100,000 a year. I say you need to realize that people who make less than $70,000 a year aren't all lazy (in fact, most of them aren't). I say you need to realize that very few people actually just want everything handed to them. I say you need to realize that health care is no different from police or schools or fire departments. Everyone should have access to them.

If any point was made here in this thread, it would be easier to give you a house or a car than health care.

That's true, and it's sad. Apparently for you son, health care costs 50% more than his house does, except that his house will be paid off some day.

Just think about that. Why even have health care if you're paying $1,500 a month? You're paying $18,000 a year. At that rate, you might as well just put it in some kind of savings account. Then at least you'll earn money on it. I mean, what's the point of insurance then?

 

[Magic Man]

Health care is a privilege not a right unless your life is in imminent danger.

Nope. Health care is a right, no matter what. And, hey, for people like you worried about them darn poor people costing you so much money, giving them preventative care before it gets to the point of imminent danger means less overall costs, considering then they don't need that expensive ER treatment.

 

[Mr Spinkles]

If any point was made here in this thread, it would be easier to give you a house or a car than health care.

IF it's paid for mostly by taxing the middle class, instead of the wealthiest 1%, maybe. At the end of the day, every other country can do it, even tiny little countries like Taiwan and Botswana have universal health insurance.

Maybe those tiny Asian and African countries could send us some humanitarian aid.

 

[Mr Spinkles]

Reverend Rick,

I'm not looking for a handout. I'm willing to pay 15% of my income for health insurance. But I would rather pay that through taxes, to a government insurance program which will actually cover me when I get old or sick, as promised. I don't trust the private insurers. I think too much of my premium is spent by private insurers on profits and advertising and lobbying.

As a consumer shouldn't I be able to choose public insurance, just as people can choose to send their kids to public schools, can choose public transportation or the post office?

 

[Reverend Rick]

Reverend Rick,

I'm not looking for a handout. I'm willing to pay 15% of my income for health insurance. But I would rather pay that through taxes, to a government insurance program which will actually cover me when I get old or sick, as promised. I don't trust the private insurers. I think too much of my premium is spent by private insurers on profits and advertising and lobbying.

As a consumer shouldn't I be able to choose public insurance, just as people can choose to send their kids to public schools, can choose public transportation or the post office?

OK, now we have found common ground. People should have to pay something for health care. It will stop frivolous doctor visits. It is not about the money really, it is about making sure that there is an appointment available for folks who are truly sick and need to see the doctor. A co-pay is necessary to insure this.

Having everyone insured will help. I have a feeling however that many folks in their 20's who are healthy will not be so happy when they have to pay their fair share or face a thousand dollar fine. People who refuse to pay this fine will wind up in jail.

Is that what you really want?

I believe we should have the government pay young people to go to medical school and they in turn could repay their student debt by serving in clinics as GP's for a certain amount of time. The patients they see should have to pay a 25 dollar co-pay to see the doctor to keep the appointment books open.

We could do this for dentists as well.

People who make more money should pay more for medical care, I'm fine with that. I just don't want to be unable to get an appointment when I really need to because the appointment books are full with people with minor complaints clogging up the system.

Adding millions to the health care rolls without adding one more hospital bed or doctors appointment on the books is health care rationing plain and simple. You are taking from one group and giving to another.

 

[Reverend Rick]

The problem is that "making enough" means making more than twice minimum wage, and many times it means making more than 3 or four times minimum wage.

Why is that a problem? You claim I have the thick skull, but yet you look down upon my state with our cheaper housing costs by making comments about how a thousand dollars a month will not buy you decent housing where you live. If you do not make several times the minimum wage per hour you have exactly a zero chance of getting ahead in life. Basically, you cannot afford to live in your state. High housing expenses coupled with low wages is a recipe for financial disaster.

The real problem is not what stuff costs, it is why you make so little money. You are obviously smart, why have you not marketed yourself better?

Just think about that. Why even have health care if you're paying $1,500 a month? You're paying $18,000 a year. At that rate, you might as well just put it in some kind of savings account. Then at least you'll earn money on it. I mean, what's the point of insurance then?

Have you ever heard of health care savings accounts? The point of insurance is to pool risk and pay a small amount to insure an unlikely event is covered, not subsidize high medical costs. If no one had health insurance, market forces would mandate that health care cost less.

Insurance IS THE REASON health care is so high.

 

[Magic Man]

OK, now we have found common ground. People should have to pay something for health care.

No one has ever said they shouldn't. I've told you plenty of times that I'm willing to pay more than I am right now for health care, in taxes for a government plan. Others have also told you they don't mind paying for it.

It will stop frivolous doctor visits. It is not about the money really, it is about making sure that there is an appointment available for folks who are truly sick and need to see the doctor. A co-pay is necessary to insure this.

No, it's not, but a co-pay could be fine as long as it's not very expensive.

Having everyone insured will help. I have a feeling however that many folks in their 20's who are healthy will not be so happy when they have to pay their fair share or face a thousand dollar fine. People who refuse to pay this fine will wind up in jail.

Is that what you really want?

Why do you always have to exaggerate? Yes, if people refuse to pay taxes, they'll eventually be thrown in jail. That's the way it works, and that's the way I want it to work. I'm sorry that some people wouldn't want to pay taxes towards health care, but that's too bad for them. I'm sure some people don't want to pay for schools or other services now, but oh well.

People who make more money should pay more for medical care, I'm fine with that. I just don't want to be unable to get an appointment when I really need to because the appointment books are full with people with minor complaints clogging up the system.

Well, it wouldn't be much different than it is now. I know all of this Faux News crap has gotten to you, and made you think the sky is falling regarding having to wait long periods of time, but talk to real people who've dealt with the system, and see how big a problem it really is (or isn't).

Adding millions to the health care rolls without adding one more hospital bed or doctors appointment on the books is health care rationing plain and simple. You are taking from one group and giving to another.

No, you're not. You're not taking health care away from anyone. Anyone wanting an appointment will still be able to get one, and most of the time there will be no delay. The rest of the time, there won't be a significant delay. Just calm down and look at the facts.

 

[Magic Man]

Why is that a problem?

Because you shouldn't have to make much money to afford health care.

You claim I have the thick skull, but yet you look down upon my state with our cheaper housing costs by making comments about how a thousand dollars a month will not buy you decent housing where you live.

I don't look down on your state. Every state's different. I'd love it if my state still had real estate for cheaper prices. I simply mentioned it to say that that number is a starting point. It was meant to say that other places you'd have to spend even more for basic bills.

If you do not make several times the minimum wage per hour you have exactly a zero chance of getting ahead in life.

What about the people who don't want to "get ahead in life"? What about the people who just want the basics and to live a simple, non-luxurious life? Why should they have to bust their humps just to make enough to afford the basics like health insurance?

[quoteBasically, you cannot afford to live in your state. High housing expenses coupled with low wages is a recipe for financial disaster.[/quote]

Exactly, which is why that needs to change. Unfortunately, the wages here haven't spiked to complement the housing costs. 8 years ago, a $1,000 mortgage would have been very reasonable. My brother bought a house about 9 years ago for $68,000. It was a little rowhome in a shady area, but not too bad. It was at least safe. When he sold it the beginning of this year, it sold for $150,000, and that's after the big drop-off in housing prices.

The real problem is not what stuff costs, it is why you make so little money.

No, the problem is how much stuff costs in relation to a decent wage.

You are obviously smart, why have you not marketed yourself better?

I see. So, it couldn't possibly be because of anything else. It must be because I'm doing something wrong.

Have you ever heard of health care savings accounts?

What's your point? I've told you many times, including in this thread, that my wife and I have very good health insurance through her job with the state.

The point of insurance is to pool risk and pay a small amount to insure an unlikely event is covered, not subsidize high medical costs. If no one had health insurance, market forces would mandate that health care cost less.

Insurance IS THE REASON health care is so high.

Well, good, then let's get rid of it, and let the government handle our coverage. Finally, we agree on something.

 

[Jackytar]

mball - I see you live in Maryland, the only state that has enforced a uniform fee schedule between health providers and insurers. In other states there can be huge disparities between what different insurers pay to providers for care, resulting in anti-competitive practices (a tendency for both providers and insurers to band together for more clout in negotiating fees). This also contributes to the huge overheads on both sides of the relationship as billers and claim processors navigate and tweak the Rube Goldberg system of medical billing codes, that can differ for each insurer.

I think uniform fee schedules are a good idea. Countries like Germany and Japan, who have universal health care provided by private insurers - as in no government insurance, not even for the elderly - enforce universal fee schedules (along with a lot of the other stuff that we are working on). I wonder how this has worked out for Maryland. What the local politicians and press are saying about this. Has it reduced costs overall? Do the hospitals compete on quality instead of volume? I can't seem to find any information about this on the interweb tubes.

Jackytar

 

[Autodidact]

OK, now we have found common ground. People should have to pay something for health care. It will stop frivolous doctor visits. It is not about the money really, it is about making sure that there is an appointment available for folks who are truly sick and need to see the doctor. A co-pay is necessary to insure this.

Having everyone insured will help. I have a feeling however that many folks in their 20's who are healthy will not be so happy when they have to pay their fair share or face a thousand dollar fine. People who refuse to pay this fine will wind up in jail.

Is that what you really want?

I believe we should have the government pay young people to go to medical school and they in turn could repay their student debt by serving in clinics as GP's for a certain amount of time. The patients they see should have to pay a 25 dollar co-pay to see the doctor to keep the appointment books open.

We could do this for dentists as well.

People who make more money should pay more for medical care, I'm fine with that. I just don't want to be unable to get an appointment when I really need to because the appointment books are full with people with minor complaints clogging up the system.

Adding millions to the health care rolls without adding one more hospital bed or doctors appointment on the books is health care rationing plain and simple. You are taking from one group and giving to another.

Sounds like a government takeover of health care to me. Maybe just universal insurance coverage would be better.

You keep repeating your last paragraph, ignoring the many times it's been repudiated. Obviously (for around the tenth time) if we stop paying insurance executives, we can use that money to pay doctors and nurses.

 

[Copernicus]

...Obviously (for around the tenth time) if we stop paying insurance executives, we can use that money to pay doctors and nurses.

But I think that this is the crux of the difference between conservatives and liberals. It is not obvious to a conservative that the huge compensation given to managers of large corporations is money that can simply be turned over to less expensive administrators. One way or the other, someone must pay for the bureaucracy that needs to be in place to deliver health care to citizens. Is that bureaucracy going to be less expensive in the long run if it is in private hands or government hands? Conservatives tend to believe that the least costly, most efficient system will evolve out of a relatively free market. Liberals and progressives tend to believe that health care can be delivered more cheaply and effectively by a government-regulated or government-owned system.

What does experience show us? The US is the last major industrial country with a largely market-driven health care delivery system. The results so far show that government-driven health care is cheaper and more effective in general. This is true even when one just compares government-managed health care within the US! It isn't perfect, but it is better than what the free-market-advocates have come up with. And there are no serious alternative proposals for health care reform from the right. Just obstructionism. Our system is broken, and they have no coherent fix for it.

 

[Magic Man]

mball - I see you live in Maryland, the only state that has enforced a uniform fee schedule between health providers and insurers. In other states there can be huge disparities between what different insurers pay to providers for care, resulting in anti-competitive practices (a tendency for both providers and insurers to band together for more clout in negotiating fees). This also contributes to the huge overheads on both sides of the relationship as billers and claim processors navigate and tweak the Rube Goldberg system of medical billing codes, that can differ for each insurer.

I think uniform fee schedules are a good idea. Countries like Germany and Japan, who have universal health care provided by private insurers - as in no government insurance, not even for the elderly - enforce universal fee schedules (along with a lot of the other stuff that we are working on). I wonder how this has worked out for Maryland. What the local politicians and press are saying about this. Has it reduced costs overall? Do the hospitals compete on quality instead of volume? I can't seem to find any information about this on the interweb tubes.

Jackytar

I'm sorry, I can't be of much help to you there. I'd have to research it just like you.

 

[Jackytar]

I'm sorry, I can't be of much help to you there. I'd have to research it just like you.

Okay, thanks.

Jackytar

 

[Mister_T]

No, I am saying these folks you refer to do not manage their money correctly. They value a nice car more than health care.

We are talking middle class here. We have some money to work with in this instance. My son is middle class. He pays 1500 a month for health care and does with out things like a nice car or cable TV.

People with I-phones and no health care are the perfect example.

I am so sick and tired of everyone feeling entitled to succeed in life. People get sick and die. People get sick and get better and have to pay medical bills.

Boo Hoo, no new Acura for me this year. Get a second job and take responsibility for yourself. You can threaten to file bankruptcy and find that creditors will work with you and reduce the amount owed and accept flexible terms of payment.

Remember folks, we are talking middle class here. Anyone want to take a stab at what the median income is in our country?

I'm so sick and tired of people against public healthcare acting as though we're advocating giving people a free steak dinner every night, not to mention the disengenuous generalizations that follow.

Look, like it or not, healthcare (like law enforcement, fire department and homeland security) was designed to be here to serve society. If the fire department or homeland security worked in the same way healthcare does, people of the nation would be outraged. But unfortunately, greed and exploitation at others expense has become acceptable in our country that is supposed to be "civilised" and one of the "best countries in the world."

Rick, I'm sorry but I do not believe your son should be making a mortgage payment every month to have a basic necessity of living in a civilised and well off nation, and I'm not sure why you find this acceptable. I am all for hard work, making it on your own and not giving people freebies in a country where you are capable of doing these things yourself, however, this is not the case with our healthcare system: Poorer countries have a better healthcare system than we do, and it's absurd. It is the equivalent to charging someone the price of a prime rib and lobster tail dinner, for a bottle of water. It is an absurd notion no matter what level of class you are.