Originally Posted by Pointer (Post 935452)

I believe Vermont is having great success with its single payer state run programs. Having lived by the Canadian boarder for many years and having had a child who spent 6 years going to school there, I can say that I knew a lot of people who preferred that system to ours. Especially when it came to catastrophic care. ie pregnancy or birth complications and cancer. Canadians sure don't want to get rid of their medical system for ours. I'm benefiting from Obama Care now that I'm here in Florida and know many others who are as well. My attitude was and is still a wait and see how it works one. And so far so good. So I'm willing to entertain a state by state single payer system as a possible improvement. With so many more people now having coverage I'm looking forward to the reduced costs of the now preventative health care vs the more costly emergency care.

Originally Posted by tedquick (Post 935567)

She did indeed say exactly what you said, however those were not the only words that she has ever spoken with regards to Exxon. The statements I quoted were not made up, in fact, they were copied from my referenced article. BTW, here are some other facts about Exxon in 2011 and I copy: Often ignored fact: ExxonMobil makes pennies per gallon on gasoline, diesel and petroleum products it refines and sells in the United States. In the first and second quarters of this year, ExxonMobil made 7 cents and 8 cents, respectively, on the gasoline, diesel and other petroleum products it refined and sold in the United States. Comparatively, local, state and federal gasoline taxes average nearly 49 cents per gallon nationally, with a high of 67 cents in states such as California and New York.

Another way of saying it is that Exxon pays more in local, state and federal gasoline taxes to the tune of 6 to 7 times as much as is their profit. With that being the case, this question must be asked: Who is the greedy one, the one who makes 7 cents per gallon in profit or the entity who takes 49 cents a gallon from you and me in taxes?

A correction here -- Exxon does not pay more in taxes than is its profit, instead you and I pay those taxes to the tune or 6 to nearly 10 times (in some cases) what Exxon's profits are. Sorry for my mis-statement. But, who is greedy?

Originally Posted by tedquick (Post 935226)

LoriAnn, you wrote: WellPoint had a profit of 38%.

I question the veracity of your informational source. In 2008, WellPoint had an after-tax profit of 4.1% of revenues. That same year the healthcare insurance industry as a whole ranked 35th (out of the 53 identified industries) with a profit of 2.2% of revenue. They were surpassed by both the healthcare facilities industry (34th) and the pharmaceutical industry (ranked 30th) with a meager 3.0% of revenue profit, hardly an enviable number. The before -tax profit of WellPoint in 2013 was 5.4% of revenue, down from 6.2% in 2012. Those numbers seem quite modest to me.

You are proposing a single-payer system. Allow me to offer the following example as one of dozens that could have been chosen: the Department of Energy was formed in 1977, in a large part to reduce our dependence on foreign oil. At that time we imported around 40% of our oil needs. 35 years later, in 2012 we still imported about 35% of those needs and yet, that year, for the first time ever, we produced as much oil as we used. Our oil industry has been able to create those kinds of resources in spite of the government’s contrarian attempts to slow production down.

So I must ask you: do you really want your healthcare needs to be handled by such incompetence? And we must never forget that the efforts driving us to a “single-payer system” are being orchestrated and propagandized by that same inefficient and ineffective bureaucracy.

Remember a few years ago when a politician thought that Exxon’s $40 billion profits were obscene and should be turned over to the government for redistribution? What was never mentioned was that Exxon had paid over 110 billion dollars in taxes that same year or nearly 3 times as much as they made in profit, but that important fact was ignored. That was politics and it was dirty because it misled those who were unaware.

This is not a political statement. Instead it is a statement of facts. It is a statement based on real numbers and it is intended to show that propaganda pieces only sell to those who are unaware.

As Ayn Rand said, “we can ignore reality, but we cannot ignore the consequences of ignoring reality”.

Originally Posted by zcaveman (Post 935419)

You do realize that since 1965 you have been paying into Medicare as part of your FICA taxes? Don't you think that you should get your money back?

If the government had invested all of the money that they have taxed out of us for SS and Medicare into the right places and not stolen it for other programs, these programs would be solvent for ages.

Z

Originally Posted by Tennisnut (Post 935656)

And what does this have to do with health care costs?

Originally Posted by zcaveman (Post 935419)

You do realize that since 1965 you have been paying into Medicare as part of your FICA taxes? Don't you think that you should get your money back?

If the government had invested all of the money that they have taxed out of us for SS and Medicare into the right places and not stolen it for other programs, these programs would be solvent for ages.

Z

Originally Posted by zcaveman (Post 935419)

You do realize that since 1965 you have been paying into Medicare as part of your FICA taxes? Don't you think that you should get your money back?

If the government had invested all of the money that they have taxed out of us for SS and Medicare into the right places and not stolen it for other programs, these programs would be solvent for ages.

Z

Originally Posted by CFrance (Post 935536)

[/B]
The same thing we do when we're living in Europe and need a doctor--either take out medical insurance or pay cash. And believe you me, the cost for the same medical care in France and Spain, where I've had experience, is a helluva lot cheaper than it is in the US.

And I would like to see some facts to back up your statement about Canadians flocking to the US for medical care. Because according to this site, that is the #1 myth about Canadian healthcare. Canada vs. US Health Care Systems - Debunking Canadian Health Care Myths - AARP

I will quote part: 99.39% of Canadians do not come to the US for medical care.

Originally Posted by Tennisnut (Post 935744)

I have been paying for years on home owners insurance and auto insurance and haven't got a nickle back! Does anyone know how I get some return on that investment! I know I paid a lot more money than that measly 2% they use to pay for SS back in the 1930s and 40s. I bet a lot people got a great return on investment from those years!

Originally Posted by rubicon (Post 936010)

Tennisnut: You did get a return it was the value of the insurance coverage you paid for that gave you peace of mind and allowed you to leverage your income because you understood that loss of home or being sued you were protected.
Frankly consideration yourself fortunate that you did not need to use your auto or homeowners.

I keep reading were people brag that they got more out of medicare then they paid in. Well nothing is free and if the premium pys can't support the benefits going out something has to give. Add fraud and abuse to the legitimate catastrophic health care losses and you can see insolvency in the future....nothing is free

Originally Posted by Tennisnut (Post 935744)

I have been paying for years on home owners insurance and auto insurance and haven't got a nickle back! Does anyone know how I get some return on that investment! I know I paid a lot more money than that measly 2% they use to pay for SS back in the 1930s and 40s. I bet a lot people got a great return on investment from those years!

Originally Posted by Dr Winston O Boogie jr (Post 936332)

I think that you may have a misconception about what insurance actually it. Insurance is basically a wager. You put up money to bet the insurance company that your home will burn down or that you'll have an auto accident or whatever the terms of the insurance state. If none of these things happen, you lose the bet. The insurance company gets to keep your money. If you total your car, you win. The insurance company has to pay you.

Originally Posted by Dr Winston O Boogie jr (Post 936332)

I think that you may have a misconception about what insurance actually it. Insurance is basically a wager. You put up money to bet the insurance company that your home will burn down or that you'll have an auto accident or whatever the terms of the insurance state. If none of these things happen, you lose the bet. The insurance company gets to keep your money. If you total your car, you win. The insurance company has to pay you.

At no time should insurance be considered an investment that you'll se a return on.

Unfortunately, what we now refer to as health insurance ceased being health insurance decades ago. What we now have is basically pooled health care coverage. We buy this so called health insurance and we expect it to pay for every medical expense that we have. I'm not defending health insurance companies, but I can't possibly see how they can make a profit from me. I have several prescription medication that they pay for and knew they were going to pay for when I signed the agreement. They know that I have several medical conditions that are going to need ongoing care from specialists. How am I risking anything? I'm just paying small amount to get my huge medical expenses paid.