[2BNTV]

Universal healthcare was first proposed in the late 40's or early 50's and it didn't pass.

The ACA was passed and it leaves a lot to be desired.

I don't think we will ever see universal healthcare work in this country. The countries that do have universal healthcare usually have a very high tax rate. People resent when more money is taken from them. The healthcare industry in the USA is too big, to lose control of their market.

I remember the days where one worked for a company and didn't have to pay much to get decent health coverage. I don't know what changed, as this has become an uncontrollable monster.

Is it a matter of healthcare companies being competitive with their rates? Do we need some form of regulation without letting the government run healthcare coverage?I know everything gets more expensive as time goes on, but this is absurd.

I don't think I will ever see a real good universal system of healthcare coverage but I am sure this will be an ever evolving system of healthcare, whether it may be good or bad. Unfortunately, I think healthcare is going in the wrong direction.

[dbussone]

Originally Posted by Cedwards38

Frankly, I see no other solution to the problem of unbridled greed in the pharmaceutical industry and the skyrocketing cost of all forms of healthcare, than a universal single payer system.



If the Declaration of Independence, adopted as the basis for our structure of American government, states that we are entitled to certain unalienable rights endowed by our Creator, and those include LIFE, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, then healthcare should be thought of as a right rather than a privilege. Thus if we have a right to healthcare, then it follows that our federal government, as the only earthly entity with authority over us all, should provide for that right. Besides that, I just think that no man, woman, or especially child should suffer, or lose their life, or face personal or family bankruptcy in America because they can not afford health insurance or health care, and I'm willing to pay for that.



Yes, the federal government attempts to manage incredibly massive programs like Social Security, Medicare, FEMA, and our military defense, and we often hear of the abuses within these programs. But there are abuses in private sector systems also, and I don't think we can or should allow the fact that mistakes will be made keep us from trying to fix this or any other problem. America has always done it's best things for moral reasons, and this is another one of those.



Thanks for bringing up the topic!

You are welcome. Thanks for sharing your thoughts.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[dbussone]

We have a diversity of comments for the most part. I'm hoping we hear from many more of our fellow posters. Good stuff, and interesting as well. Thanks for participating.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[blueash]

Those presently on Medicare did not pay enough into it for the care they are getting now. Those getting lifetime corporate insurance did not have their salary lowered enough to cover what it is now costing the company to cover you. The cost of health care continues to escalate beyond any reasonable previous estimate.
Someone has got to pay the bill. You want an MRI for your aching hip? You didn't pay for that. You paid into a system that had Xrays at 25 dollars each. So please stop saying you earned your health care coverage.
The ACA has struggled to get healthy younger people to sign up. It has done well getting sick people to sign up and therein lies the rate increases demanded by carriers. The unenforced penalties for remaining uninsured are too low to encourage those non-compliers.
Think of it this way. If your automobile insurance cost 800/ month and there was no penalty for driving uninsured other than a 10 ticket and no concern with your assets being at risk in an accident, would most people by that coverage?
So the solution is universal coverage, like we have universal fire protection, universal police protection, universal road construction, universal military, and universal clean water. It that a threat to Aetna or BCBS, maybe. But they can continue to offer coverage in parallel with the government option.
If you are so convinced that the government can't run anything efficiently, then it will very easy for Aetna to simply charge the same as the cost of the universal coverage and turn a handsome profit.
Example, if the cost of care of the average American is 800/mo then you the consumer have the option of receiving your coverage via the government option, or selecting an alternative insurer which would then receive that 800/mo from the government for the exact same coverage package with all the same doctors and hospitals and medications.
No networks.
If you want non-standard care, not covered. If you want only brand name drugs, extra cost, but identical for all carriers. If Aetna is so efficient they will love this plan. No adverse selection, just sign up all those who prefer to deal with Aetna and not a government agency.
How does this get financed? Same way we pay for healthcare now. All employers will pay something into the cost of care as a tax as will employees. Some money will come from income taxes, some corporate, some from perhaps a tax on financial transactions.
And it is a myth that the cost of malpractice insurance or defensive medical care is what drives up healthcare.

[ColdNoMore]

Originally Posted by blueash

Those presently on Medicare did not pay enough into it for the care they are getting now. Those getting lifetime corporate insurance did not have their salary lowered enough to cover what it is now costing the company to cover you. The cost of health care continues to escalate beyond any reasonable previous estimate.
Someone has got to pay the bill. You want an MRI for your aching hip? You didn't pay for that. You paid into a system that had Xrays at 25 dollars each. So please stop saying you earned your health care coverage.
The ACA has struggled to get healthy younger people to sign up. It has done well getting sick people to sign up and therein lies the rate increases demanded by carriers. The unenforced penalties for remaining uninsured are too low to encourage those non-compliers.
Think of it this way. If your automobile insurance cost 800/ month and there was no penalty for driving uninsured other than a 10 ticket and no concern with your assets being at risk in an accident, would most people by that coverage?
So the solution is universal coverage, like we have universal fire protection, universal police protection, universal road construction, universal military, and universal clean water. It that a threat to Aetna or BCBS, maybe. But they can continue to offer coverage in parallel with the government option.
If you are so convinced that the government can't run anything efficiently, then it will very easy for Aetna to simply charge the same as the cost of the universal coverage and turn a handsome profit.
Example, if the cost of care of the average American is 800/mo then you the consumer have the option of receiving your coverage via the government option, or selecting an alternative insurer which would then receive that 800/mo from the government for the exact same coverage package with all the same doctors and hospitals and medications.
No networks.
If you want non-standard care, not covered. If you want only brand name drugs, extra cost, but identical for all carriers. If Aetna is so efficient they will love this plan. No adverse selection, just sign up all those who prefer to deal with Aetna and not a government agency.
How does this get financed? Same way we pay for healthcare now. All employers will pay something into the cost of care as a tax as will employees. Some money will come from income taxes, some corporate, some from perhaps a tax on financial transactions.
And it is a myth that the cost of malpractice insurance or defensive medical care is what drives up healthcare.

....

[goodtimesintv]

Originally Posted by blueash

Those presently on Medicare did not pay enough into it for the care they are getting now. Those getting lifetime corporate insurance did not have their salary lowered enough to cover what it is now costing the company to cover you. The cost of health care continues to escalate beyond any reasonable previous estimate.
Someone has got to pay the bill. You want an MRI for your aching hip? You didn't pay for that. You paid into a system that had Xrays at 25 dollars each. So please stop saying you earned your health care coverage.
The ACA has struggled to get healthy younger people to sign up. It has done well getting sick people to sign up and therein lies the rate increases demanded by carriers. The unenforced penalties for remaining uninsured are too low to encourage those non-compliers.
Think of it this way. If your automobile insurance cost 800/ month and there was no penalty for driving uninsured other than a 10 ticket and no concern with your assets being at risk in an accident, would most people by that coverage?
So the solution is universal coverage, like we have universal fire protection, universal police protection, universal road construction, universal military, and universal clean water. It that a threat to Aetna or BCBS, maybe. But they can continue to offer coverage in parallel with the government option.
If you are so convinced that the government can't run anything efficiently, then it will very easy for Aetna to simply charge the same as the cost of the universal coverage and turn a handsome profit.
Example, if the cost of care of the average American is 800/mo then you the consumer have the option of receiving your coverage via the government option, or selecting an alternative insurer which would then receive that 800/mo from the government for the exact same coverage package with all the same doctors and hospitals and medications.
No networks.
If you want non-standard care, not covered. If you want only brand name drugs, extra cost, but identical for all carriers. If Aetna is so efficient they will love this plan. No adverse selection, just sign up all those who prefer to deal with Aetna and not a government agency.
How does this get financed? Same way we pay for healthcare now. All employers will pay something into the cost of care as a tax as will employees. Some money will come from income taxes, some corporate, some from perhaps a tax on financial transactions.
And it is a myth that the cost of malpractice insurance or defensive medical care is what drives up healthcare.

I like what you wrote. But the real problem is that under your proposed system, Aetna and all the others like it are going to keep on charging as they wish, because their most lucrative business will still come from the federal government and Congress employees who fought tooth and nail (during ACA mandate making)......to keep their 20+ PRIVATE plans with us paying about 70% of their premiums for them.

See plan comparison list here, and then see "Premiums" in the menu:

Health & Insurance : Plan Information - OPM.gov

.

[NYGUY]

We can quit saying we will never vote for Universal Healthcare. We will be dead. Those coming after us will vote for it. This is an interesting conversation, but 20 year old's should be having it.

[graciegirl]

Originally Posted by NYGUY

We can quit saying we will never vote for Universal Healthcare. We will be dead. Those coming after us will vote for it. This is an interesting conversation, but 20 year old's should be having it.

Most of the times your posts are great, but this one is brilliant.

[petsetc]

I remember (as all our age do) when there were regulated monopolies, airlines, utilities, phones ... That was ended to allow the "free market" to bring down prices and promote competition ... not sure how that's working out.

Social Security (and the VA) are legislatively prohibited from negotiating drug pricing. Although the $ amount of fraud in the Medicare system is staggering, as a % of total dollars it is not too bad.

The EpiPen was developed with federal funds, yet of the new $600 price, I believe the taxpayers royalty is zero.

Perhaps health care should not be a for-profit industry.

Just a few thoughts.

[goodtimesintv]

Originally Posted by NYGUY

We can quit saying we will never vote for Universal Healthcare. We will be dead. Those coming after us will vote for it. This is an interesting conversation, but 20 year old's should be having it.

This is true and I agree with it. However, it is still our responsibility to teach our children and grandchildren what we have learned from experience, and can learn now, having the TIME to read and study while they are working to make ends meet.

And after reading, studying, and working in it for 40-50 years, WE still don't know all that goes into the sausage making that is DC--District of Collusion--and their "accountability" to us.

[Avista]

Originally Posted by petsetc

I remember (as all our age do) when there were regulated monopolies, airlines, utilities, phones ... That was ended to allow the "free market" to bring down prices and promote competition ... not sure how that's working out.

Social Security (and the VA) are legislatively prohibited from negotiating drug pricing. Although the $ amount of fraud in the Medicare system is staggering, as a % of total dollars it is not too bad.

The EpiPen was developed with federal funds, yet of the new $600 price, I believe the taxpayers royalty is zero.

Perhaps health care should not be a for-profit industry.

Just a few thoughts.

My thought also. healthcare should be nonprofit. People should not make money from other people's illnesses

[Chi-Town]

Originally Posted by blueash

Those presently on Medicare did not pay enough into it for the care they are getting now. Those getting lifetime corporate insurance did not have their salary lowered enough to cover what it is now costing the company to cover you. The cost of health care continues to escalate beyond any reasonable previous estimate.
Someone has got to pay the bill. You want an MRI for your aching hip? You didn't pay for that. You paid into a system that had Xrays at 25 dollars each. So please stop saying you earned your health care coverage.
The ACA has struggled to get healthy younger people to sign up. It has done well getting sick people to sign up and therein lies the rate increases demanded by carriers. The unenforced penalties for remaining uninsured are too low to encourage those non-compliers.
Think of it this way. If your automobile insurance cost 800/ month and there was no penalty for driving uninsured other than a 10 ticket and no concern with your assets being at risk in an accident, would most people by that coverage?
So the solution is universal coverage, like we have universal fire protection, universal police protection, universal road construction, universal military, and universal clean water. It that a threat to Aetna or BCBS, maybe. But they can continue to offer coverage in parallel with the government option.
If you are so convinced that the government can't run anything efficiently, then it will very easy for Aetna to simply charge the same as the cost of the universal coverage and turn a handsome profit.
Example, if the cost of care of the average American is 800/mo then you the consumer have the option of receiving your coverage via the government option, or selecting an alternative insurer which would then receive that 800/mo from the government for the exact same coverage package with all the same doctors and hospitals and medications.
No networks.
If you want non-standard care, not covered. If you want only brand name drugs, extra cost, but identical for all carriers. If Aetna is so efficient they will love this plan. No adverse selection, just sign up all those who prefer to deal with Aetna and not a government agency.
How does this get financed? Same way we pay for healthcare now. All employers will pay something into the cost of care as a tax as will employees. Some money will come from income taxes, some corporate, some from perhaps a tax on financial transactions.
And it is a myth that the cost of malpractice insurance or defensive medical care is what drives up healthcare.

Excellent post. Employers will like it as they will not have the administration costs they once had either in house or an outside firm. Employees will like it, because they will have the freedom to choose an employment path without losing their coverage. The ACA is a step in that direction. But the compromises needed weakened it.

[dbussone]

Originally Posted by Avista

My thought also. healthcare should be nonprofit. People should not make money from other people's illnesses

Having worked in healthcare for as long as I did, I can assure you that there is little difference between for-profit and not-for-profit hospitals. Both need to make money to stay open. One pays dividends to its investors, the other retains its profits. One pays taxes, the other doesn't. And on it goes.

I've worked in both environments. Given two capable and similar facilities I could go to either. However, my physician's preference would play a significant role in my decision. And I think this relationship is going to continue to change if we move closer to universal healthcare.



Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[Madelaine Amee]

Originally Posted by Cedwards38

Frankly, I see no other solution to the problem of unbridled greed in the pharmaceutical industry and the skyrocketing cost of all forms of healthcare, than a universal single payer system.

If the Declaration of Independence, adopted as the basis for our structure of American government, states that we are entitled to certain unalienable rights endowed by our Creator, and those include LIFE, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, then healthcare should be thought of as a right rather than a privilege. Thus if we have a right to healthcare, then it follows that our federal government, as the only earthly entity with authority over us all, should provide for that right. Besides that, I just think that no man, woman, or especially child should suffer, or lose their life, or face personal or family bankruptcy in America because they can not afford health insurance or health care, and I'm willing to pay for that.

Yes, the federal government attempts to manage incredibly massive programs like Social Security, Medicare, FEMA, and our military defense, and we often hear of the abuses within these programs. But there are abuses in private sector systems also, and I don't think we can or should allow the fact that mistakes will be made keep us from trying to fix this or any other problem. America has always done it's best things for moral reasons, and this is another one of those.

Thanks for bringing up the topic!

You are not alone in your thinking .......... I suspect there are many of us who agree with you. Were it not for the greed and corruption throughout both parties more would be done to help those that really need it.

[rubicon]

Indeed a complex topic and one too large for these pages.

One poster views healthcare as a right. I find it convenient when people invent rights for themselves. there is no legal or constitutional basis for such a right, no more than saying people have a right to own a home. We saw what that sort of thinking did to the housing industry with lax underwriting and we see how we are in multi-trillion dollar debt for student loans that many students believe they have a right not to pay back...........................and another dimension to this issue of "my right" is the fact that I am entitled to a lot of right ...its the American way

As to funding the short of it is that the federal government is too big too complex too under educated to handle managing 1/6th of our economy.

The central issue in the OP's topic is funding. The ACA laws were passed with the option to let people in or out at their leisure. Insurance is a pooling of resources by many for the benefit of some especially when it comes to catastrophic losses that the average family cannot absorb. so we have people who get sick buy insurance treat get better drop out. We have young people who being healthy will never opt in until they have a need. etc etc.

Again with sensible regulations and underwriting private insurers can do a better job both managing benefits vis a vis premiums and the fraud and abuse associated with this funding because it all means profit. and keep in mind insurance laws are written that contain the expense component of premium remain fixed. Premium are calculated on an ongoing basis to reflect what is occurring in the economy (marketplace) ACA insurance companies bleeding money are going to individual policies not in ACA to subsidized their losses . Tell me where or when the government worried about expenses or spending. I mean its someone else's money and it is low lying fruit to be picked at any time

This is an issue for us now because we are affected by it now. ACA instigated the mess we are in now. It has reverberated across the healthcare spectrum. My company because of ACA stopped negotiating insurance for its retirees because ACA removed the insurability option. so now the company offers an annual stipend and we do our own search . Ironically we chose the same health care plan as was offered by our company. the kicker is they tell me if we opt out then we are subjected to insurability. The reasoning is obvious and stated above.

ACA has been a disaster and it was meant to be because its authors really wanted a single payer system and so they intentionally have placed a lot of people in harms way to get their political agenda. IMHO people will rue the day they concede to government control vis a vis free enterprise for this large portion of our economy.