Medicare for All
 

What is Medicare for all with no premiums, no co pays, no Doctor limitations and the only premium for it is a $200 max cost for drugs/year. That does not sound like Medicare that I have. I have co pays, premiums and pay extra to have drug coverage and this after paying for years. Also certain coverages stop after awhile. My health care is not a right.

This campaign should not be calling this Medicare because it has no resemblance to Medicare which is not free by any measure.

Should be called socialized medicine. Get in line.

Medicare for All stands for Vote for Me and I'll give you everything for FREE. Sometimes that word FREE is all a person needs to hear to support or vote for an individual that's promising Free this and Free that. These people don't have the mindset or technical skills to research the right or wrong of promises being made to secure Votes. So, FREE, is all they will hear. Then those people pass it on to others in the realm of their life and thus followers are produced. They don't even think about who will pay their way or how this type of socialism will take money out of the pockets of hard working people. If you watched the Debate last night you saw people who are using the media to filter particular TRIGGER WORDS, like FREE, or MEDICARE FOR ALL or I was poor like you too, or little children told me this or that. Most of those on the debate last night do not have the intellect, professional or political experience, and I really wish there was one running, to actually be President. They don't have a clue to what the job entails.

Most of these people running have no idea. They never paid for their GREAT coverage. Government has pretty well ruined good health care that was affordable. They have no idea.

When such statements of

"_ _ _ _ _ free for all...."

are made the immediate follow up question should be how much is it going to cost and where will the $$$ come from.

Just imagine the impact on the care providing system in The Villages if on top of the already stressed capacity of providers.....another 25-50% increase (pick a number you like) in participation.

The end result? Less medical service and attention for everybody.

Unfortunately the magic word "free" elicits a strong response from the masses.

Where is the "like" button on ToTV....so many comments where I'd click on it!!

May I have your permission to copy this and post on Facebook?

The plan you refer to exists, and is called Medicaid. It's not available for all, but it is available for Americans who can't otherwise afford medical care. It is currently paid for through federal income tax. If you have received a paycheck from someone, you have paid the tax for it. The only thing is that the number of doctors who participate are extremely limited so yes - you can go to any doctor you want - but if the doctor doesn't participate, you pay 100% of their bill.

Socialized medicine isn't free, it is paid for through taxes. But you don't pay taxes PLUS a monthly premium. So in other words, the subscription itself - is free. The care is already paid for.

won't be long till this thread is closed

Clear, concise answer. Thanks. :bigbow:

People should try Google too. The Facts on Medicare for All - FactCheck.org

You say that Medicaid is paid for through Federal income tax. But, you failed to mention that the Government spends way more than they collect in taxes, much of it for Medicaid. That is why we have a 22 trillion dollar debt, and so far this fiscal year, we have already spent over a trillion dollars more than we have received in taxes. So, I think it is more accurate to say that about two thirds of Medicaid is paid for with taxes, and the other third is paid for with borrowed money that our country will need to pay back in the future.

There was an article that various hospitals and other health care providers are suing MEDICAID for the costs of services provided, either the individual or their estate. Apparently there was a law signed under Clinton(?) possibly Obama(?) that allows this, so IMHO, while Medicaid might appear to be "free" or very low cost while you are living you or your estate may get hit later. The article was very interesting and something I did not realize. I tried to provide a link but it was not linkable.

Social media is a worldwide avenue to everyone's life and positions. You have my permission.

Don’t think you will find too many highly sought after doctors that accept Medicaid, even Medicare doesn’t pay enough for their time for your visit. With free healthcare, you will still end up with 2 systems as those able to afford better care will still pay out of pocket for quality care.

I agree, but there are 70 million people enrolled on Medicaid and 43 million on Medicare. So, there must be a lot of doctors accepting these programs.

I assumed permission and you have received much praise already.

First is everyone willing to admit there is a very serious problem that is coming and the sooner we address it the less painful that will be. Namely healthcare is going to bankrupt our country in the not to distant future if we don't do something to change course.

The question is , what is the solution. More of the same is NOT a solution. More of what is not working is not going to magically start working.

The comment "free" really is a dog whistle that will gets lots of cheering and accomplishes nothing - on either side. Nothing is FREE. And anyone over 12 should realize it. Democrats that run on the use of the term "free" are doing themselves and the country a disservice. Some have defined how they plan to pay for the "medicare for all", some haven't. Those that have not provided a mechanism to pay for their plan, should be ignored - by both liberals and conservatives.

In my opinion the first step to solve a problem is to define the problem. I would like to hear your definition of the problem.

My definition of the problem is what I call predatory capitalism. That is the concept of profit at any expense. That a corporation has only one goal and that is to maximize profit, regardless of what it costs society or citizens. There is nothing wrong with predatory capitalism in the case of things that are not necessary. Cars, TV, Airplanes, etc, etc. However, when a company can hold a parent hostage by charging exorbitant fees for a $10 shot that would save their Childs life, that is predatory capitalism that is immoral and should not be permitted - IMHO.

I am all in favor of capitalism when the market can control it, which is only true when you life is not held hostage by the corporation.

So, here is my idea of how to solve the problem and there is numerous successful examples of this around the world.

The idea is that we recognize that basic healthcare is a human right every citizen should have. As such the government taxes everyone, and uses those to provide basic healthcare to everyone. Citizens do not pay the doctor, citizens to not pay the pharmacy, citizens do not pay the hospital. The government pays for it all, and collects taxes to fund that payment - nothing is free.

Notice I said BASIC healthcare. I do think that private health insurance should be available to anyone that wants and can afford it - to cover say, heart transplants, etc. The details of what is BASIC and what was not can be debated, and should be.

To make this work, free market capitalism can not be allowed in the basic healthcare market. The government must regulate costs, otherwise you end up with the fiasco that is going on with universities, where tuition has sky rocketed to the point that students now have trillions of dollars of debt, just to get an education This happened at least in part because the government provided "free" loans to students, so they could afford to pay the tuition, the universities saw the students could affords more, so they charged more. Round and round it went with skyrocketing tuition costs.

That is what happens with the government "pays" for something supplied by the free market. Market responds by adjusting the price to what people can afford, and with the government, there is no limit to what it appears to be able to afford.

So, to "fix" healthcare, we have to decide as a country that healthcare is a right, everyone must have access to basic healthcare. That has real benefits for society, with increased productivity, reduced illness (reducing costs) and people getting treatment for most basic issues early when it is less expensive than waiting until it is serious and expensive. To achieve that and not have the healthcare industry costs run crazy, the government must regulate (control/socialism) the healthcare industry. We would set a "reasonable" profit level that companies can make - 15% to 25%. Not 1000% profit. With a fixed profit margin, the government can then calculate the necessary tax rates to pay the costs.

As I saids this system (or variations of it can be seen around the world if you want to look, instead of pointing out failed socialistic states, look at the successes.

For a closers to home example look to the VA healthcare system. The VA struggles because they can not regulate costs, but they can negotiate costs (unlike Medicare) and that helps. So, the VA has a cost incentive to keep you healthy. They have a limited budget, and if you get sick, it costs them to cure you. If they can keep you healthy it helps meet their budget. And that attitude showed in everything they do. Unlike Medicare where the doctors have NO motivation to keep you healthy, their profit is in TREATING YOU not preventing to curing illness. It works.

That is my proposal, socialized medicine, similar to the VA healthcare.

What is your solution? I expect most posts (if anyone bothers to post) about my solution will simply be to tell me how stupid I am. Maybe I am stupid, but I have a plan, do you? How do you propose solving the coming unsustainable healthcare costs? Dos you solution work for you alone, or for everyone? Should the solution work only for the rich, or for everyone?

I am interested in honest disagreement supported with reasonable arguments, name calling and dog whistles with no supporting evidence will one ignore.

When Current Medicare was proposed we heard similar cries of “it will never work”. What would most seniors do without Medicare today? There are many proposals for changes in our health care system currently being “floated” about especially during election years. Sense there are so many “players” involved in any change i.e. Insurance companies, doctors, pharmaceutical companies, Hospitals, Clinics, Congress, and The President to name a few - it’s complicated. Frankly, I am not knowledgeable enough to make an intelligent comment on what changes should be made in our health care systems so I am going to hope for the best outcome and deal with whatever that outcome happens to be.

That is a very thoughtful and useful post. Thanks. Maybe we can get an intelligent conversation started. I have met many intelligent people here in the Villages and many in Florida when I was volunteering at two public libraries in Palm Harbor, FL. I hope people with more than dog whistles and gross overgeneralizations will join in this TOTV.

How should I justify in my mind that if a person don’t work long enough and hard enough on a job good enough to pay for their own medical, then they can just die. I think the government should offer free euthanasia and body disposal so we don’t end up with decaying poor dead people all over the place. Maybe a look at soylent green as an alternative.

Healthcare in the Netherlands: A guide to the Dutch healthcare system - TransferWise

We should examine what other countries have done about their health care systems.

Yes! :bigbow:

I had a friend in the Netherlands that had to wait more than four months for a Mastectomy. In Austria they pay more than 50% taxes but they get free college tuition..... but only the highest performing quarter of the high school graduating class is allowed to attend.

It is interesting that the link provided doesn't say anything about a four month wait for a major, time sensitive surgery. Seems like that would be an important thing to include in the health care description.

Here is my health plan. The Government should provide:

1. Catastrophic insurance coverage for all citizens
2. Basic coverage for indigents
3. Regulations against price gouging
4. A competitive marketplace for health care where the patient has choices and financial responsibility
5. Private insurance should be available, but no plan should be allowed to provide 100 percent payment for covered services.

I believe that competition and patient involvement is the only way to control costs.

• Netherlands: waiting time for surgery or hospitalization, by treatment 2016 | Statista

I did find this.

• Netherlands: waiting time for surgery or hospitalization, by treatment 2016 | Statista

Some post fake news, but when it comes to medical treatment we all have a responsibility to the truth.

I went to the link, but it looks like you have to pay to read the statistics?

Thank you, Tal. Wait time for elective surgery might be a lot longer than for critical care situations.

In the Netherlands, even elective surgery like breast Enhancement is only 6 weeks. 4 months waiting for a required surgery is not true. We all must do fact checking before making untrue statements. This is about health and could have a negative affect on someone’s mental status.

Hospital waiting times keep rising in Netherlands | NL Times

Please research before making false claims.

That's what I was thinking. Breast reduction surgery is not a crucial surgery. It's elective.

Look at this one
Hospital waiting times keep rising in Netherlands | NL Times

When comparing health care systems of various countries, we need to look at what seems, at first, to be unrelated spending. That is, defense spending. Look at the tax rates in the countries that have been cited: Canada, Netherlands, Sweeden. Virtually no military spending, so their near-confiscatory tax rates can support universal health care. If the US were to eliminate military spending, or drastically cut such spending, and then adopt the same near-confiscatory tax rates, we could afford universal health care. I'm not at all convinced that going that route would be advisable. I can't imagine any other country coming to our defense.

We have nuclear weapons, however, which do seem to put in question the need of the development of pre-WWI kind of navies, air forces and armies. This is no longer 1944 as we had the events of 1945 that should have changed drastically how we look at the military. It does though really highlight the need for human intelligence on the ground with respect to others' capabilities related to nuclear weapons. The cold war and all that.

This was my friends sister and it happened about four years ago.

Many of the 70million are children whose families live in poverty. Many of the 70million are adults who are usually healthy and have few medical needs at all. Some Medicaid recipients are homeless, some are drug addicted, some have chronic illness that requires long-term treatment.

But as I said - not all physicians accept Medicaid. Many do not. So if you have a bad knee that can be repaired (rather than replaced) they might force you to undergo months of excruciating physical therapy, multiple prescription drugs including steroids, a myriad of tests, and basically exhaust every POSSIBLE non-surgical method of treatment for a few years, until they finally cave and authorize the surgery. And then, the closest doctor who accepts Medicaid patients and does the out-patient surgery is a 3-hour drive from your house.

Good luck with that.

Medicaid is wonderful - if you have few medical needs. There are kids whose parents drive them every weekend to an entirely different state for chemo treatments, because their state's chemo center that accepts children - don't accept childrens' medicaid. Or there's a 2-year waiting list for those that do.

Her post is also inaccurate with regards to public universities in Austria. They are tuition-free to ALL Austrian students, and only non-Austrians pay a modest tuition fee, and ALL students pay a student union fee.

Note that the ACA has been gutted. Those are not my words but come directly from the Government.

We were told there would be an alternative, but still not forthcoming.

Adding that Bucco loudly and with great gusto opposed the ACA on this forum (see my past posts in that regard during that time frame), but certainly never expected it to be gutted without a replacement. I felt it would end up being modified, hopefully improvedon.

Then it is our responsibility as the people who decide who gets to be those plan managers, to decide wisely.