Health Insurance

[TigerGrowls]

What people think universal healthcare does:

- Provides "free" medical care for all
- Eliminates medical bankruptcies
- Creates efficient single-payer system
- Reduces overall costs through economies of scale

What universal healthcare actually does:

- Forces productive citizens to subsidize others' poor health choices through taxation
- Creates artificial scarcity through price controls and rationing
- Eliminates price signals that coordinate supply and demand
- Generates massive waiting lists and deteriorating quality

You're not getting "free" healthcare. You're getting Soviet-style central planning applied to life-and-death decisions.

 

[MTTiger19]

I currently pay $4200 a month for family health insurance.

When the affordable Care act was passed I was paying about $1600 a month.

ACA is simply talking the burden of the healthcare of the bottom quintile and placing it on the middle class. It worked perfectly. They, the disadvantaged, get free healthcare while middle class folks get terrible healthcare that they must pay full price for and have to pay for the poors. It’s similar to a report I saw the other day where the state of NY spends more money on homeless peoples subsidies(82,000$) than the average income of a working NYer (81,000$). The reason the cost is so high per those officials is “mental health, addiction and outreach in a high cost city” and YOU have to pay for that. Even though you’re not mentally ill, addicted to drugs or anything else and don’t live in a high cost city these things are YOUR responsibility, not the people that got addicted to the drugs or choose to live in NYC. In other words, you’re better off not working if you’re not making big money. Same with healthcare, you’re better off being on the government dole than working and providing your own insurance.

 

[baltimorened]

ACA is simply talking the burden of the healthcare of the bottom quintile and placing it on the middle class. It worked perfectly. They, the disadvantaged, get free healthcare while middle class folks get terrible healthcare that they must pay full price for and have to pay for the poors. It’s similar to a report I saw the other day where the state of NY spends more money on homeless peoples subsidies(82,000$) than the average income of a working NYer (81,000$). The reason the cost is so high per those officials is “mental health, addiction and outreach in a high cost city” and YOU have to pay for that. Even though you’re not mentally ill, addicted to drugs or anything else and don’t live in a high cost city these things are YOUR responsibility, not the people that got addicted to the drugs or choose to live in NYC. In other words, you’re better off not working if you’re not making big money. Same with healthcare, you’re better off being on the government dole than working and providing your own insurance.

health care is another of those issues that are not working for Americans...add it to the list of others - immigration, taxes and debt, to name a few. And, just to be clear, these didn't just start during this Trump, Biden administrations or whomever.. We've had these same problems for years

 

[MTTiger19]

health care is another of those issues that are not working for Americans...add it to the list of others - immigration, taxes and debt, to name a few. And, just to be clear, these didn't just start during this Trump, Biden administrations or whomever.. We've had these same problems for years

I remember pre-ACA. It was very good for working people. So good that the government had to come in and make it suck. Specifically comrade obama.

 

[baltimorened]

I remember pre-ACA. It was very good for working people. So good that the government had to come in and make it suck. Specifically comrade obama.

Obamacare might have been a good idea with really worthwhile goals...we were going to insure everybody, get better healthcare and save money for everybody.

It hasn't worked that way, circumstances changed the plan financing. And things like that happen...nobody's direct fault.

But for lord's sake let's recognize that the system is not working as intended or designed and let's fix it. That's the rational thing to do. And, anybody who thinks single payer is the answer needs to look at Canada or the UK. The only, singular reason for single payer is the expectation that somebody else is going to pick up the majority of your bill.

 

[MTTiger19]

Obamacare might have been a good idea with really worthwhile goals...we were going to insure everybody, get better healthcare and save money for everybody.

It hasn't worked that way, circumstances changed the plan financing. And things like that happen...nobody's direct fault.

But for lord's sake let's recognize that the system is not working as intended or designed and let's fix it. That's the rational thing to do. And, anybody who thinks single payer is the answer needs to look at Canada or the UK. The only, singular reason for single payer is the expectation that somebody else is going to pick up the majority of your bill.

Here’s the thing about healthcare that we need to decide on. Is it a right or is not? If it’s a right, then doctors, nurses, hospitals, administrators, etc need to take massive pay cuts and should be completely non-profit. If we aren’t willing to do that, and so far the whole of healthcare workers don’t want to, we need to rethink healthcare. It’s a business right now, period. Businesses are designed to make profit, period. We would have to completely scrap the current system.

 

[bdgan]

Here’s the thing about healthcare that we need to decide on. Is it a right or is not? If it’s a right, then doctors, nurses, hospitals, administrators, etc need to take massive pay cuts and should be completely non-profit. If we aren’t willing to do that, and so far the whole of healthcare workers don’t want to, we need to rethink healthcare. It’s a business right now, period. Businesses are designed to make profit, period. We would have to completely scrap the current system.

IMO very strong opinion healthcare is not a right. I think our only rights are outlined in the Bill of Rights. |We can still choose to provide for less fortunate people or even the population at large but that's what elections and bills are for. I think it's very dangerous to call it a right because that means it's not a choice of how much and how many. It means that some people have a guaranteed right to other people's labor. That's fiscal suicide. Where does it end? Is food a right? Utilities? Housing? College Education? Cell phones?

IMO the big problem is that people don't want to put a price on things like health and education. Don't provide enough subsidies and you get accused of killing people. The amount needed never ends. We used to have some doctors and some hospitals but relatively few specialists. Now you can't drive 5 miles down the road without seeing a slew of medical centers. Mental healthcare used to be minimal and now it has exploded. Whose idea was it to have insurance cover GLP-1 drugs? Try to limit federal spending on the administrative portion of university research and you're killing millions of people. Bottom line is if there can't be limits there can't be cost control.

 

[bdgan]

Obamacare might have been a good idea with really worthwhile goals...we were going to insure everybody, get better healthcare and save money for everybody.

It hasn't worked that way, circumstances changed the plan financing. And things like that happen...nobody's direct fault.

But for lord's sake let's recognize that the system is not working as intended or designed and let's fix it. That's the rational thing to do. And, anybody who thinks single payer is the answer needs to look at Canada or the UK. The only, singular reason for single payer is the expectation that somebody else is going to pick up the majority of your bill.

I don't think it was ever a good idea. It was full of bad assumptions like more spending up front means less spending later or that government non profit co-ops would be more efficient than insurance companies who have been doing this for decades.

Obamacare turned out to be mostly a huge expansion of Medicaid and not one dime to the deficit turned into $200 billion a year to the deficit.

 

[MTTiger19]

IMO very strong opinion healthcare is not a right. I think our only rights are outlined in the Bill of Rights. |We can still choose to provide for less fortunate people or even the population at large but that's what elections and bills are for. I think it's very dangerous to call it a right because that means it's not a choice of how much and how many. It means that some people have a guaranteed right to other people's labor. That's fiscal suicide. Where does it end? Is food a right? Utilities? Housing? College Education? Cell phones?

IMO the big problem is that people don't want to put a price on things like health and education. Don't provide enough subsidies and you get accused of killing people. The amount needed never ends. We used to have some doctors and some hospitals but relatively few specialists. Now you can't drive 5 miles down the road without seeing a slew of medical centers. Mental healthcare used to be minimal and now it has exploded. Whose idea was it to have insurance cover GLP-1 drugs? Try to limit federal spending on the administrative portion of university research and you're killing millions of people. Bottom line is if there can't be limits there can't be cost control.

That’s basically what pre-ACA healthcare was - and they destroyed it. The left acts like people weren’t getting care prior to ACA and that’s simply not true. They weren’t getting premium, top tier healthcare and drugs but the entire thing was free. Obamacare was about checking the privileges of the middle class, they hated seeing a populist, working class group with upward mobility because that’s a real threat. So the answer was to saddle the middle class with all the expenses of top tier healthcare for people that haven’t earned it and absolutely do not deserve it. So now we get to pay for premium healthcare for free loaders and illegals while we have terrible “coverage” that’s unaffordable.

 

[PawPride]

I think our "rights" expand as society grows and technology advances. I would argue that broadband internet should probably be considered a "right" since society has evolved to the point where you kind of need internet access if you want to participate in society. I also think that healthcare has probably evolved into a "right" thanks to the marked improvements in medical advancements.

 

[tigres88]

That’s basically what pre-ACA healthcare was - and they destroyed it. The left acts like people weren’t getting care prior to ACA and that’s simply not true. They weren’t getting premium, top tier healthcare and drugs but the entire thing was free. Obamacare was about checking the privileges of the middle class, they hated seeing a populist, working class group with upward mobility because that’s a real threat. So the answer was to saddle the middle class with all the expenses of top tier healthcare for people that haven’t earned it and absolutely do not deserve it. So now we get to pay for premium healthcare for free loaders and illegals while we have terrible “coverage” that’s unaffordable.

At the end of the day, the political dichotomy is so vast in this country and we all just follow along, that we end up getting screwed. Pig Boi talks all day like his insurance premiums are through the roof and they shouldn't be. Well... yeah, all of ours that have families are. Mine tripled.

Rather than coming to a bipartisan decision about the Covid era subsidies at all, none of our elected officials negotiated in good faith and could not come to a middle ground. So they got pushed out over and over, until they ran out. Rather than negotiate before they ran out, our government officials let them run out, pushing healthcare costs through the roof.

Why? So both sides could use it as a talking point for the midterms, screwing their constituents on both sides, so they could "win."

We the people suffer and it's ridiculous. Our elected officials don't have our best interest at heart and we suffer for it.

 

[baltimorened]

I think our "rights" expand as society grows and technology advances. I would argue that broadband internet should probably be considered a "right" since society has evolved to the point where you kind of need internet access if you want to participate in society. I also think that healthcare has probably evolved into a "right" thanks to the marked improvements in medical advancements.

wow, following that logic, you need housing - a right: electricity - a right: food - a right....where does it end?

 

[PawPride]

wow, following that logic, you need housing - a right: electricity - a right: food - a right....where does it end?

I mean, yeah, I think all those things should be basic rights. Not that they should be provided for free, but there should be some safeguards in place to keep the most vulnerable of our society safe and capable of being productive members of society.

 

[baltimorened]

I mean, yeah, I think all those things should be basic rights. Not that they should be provided for free, but there should be some safeguards in place to keep the most vulnerable of our society safe and capable of being productive members of society.

it seems like a slippery slope from "right" to free.

I think most of us will agree on the need to protect the most vulnerable among us. The distinction comes in defining "most vulnerable".

 

[PawPride]

it seems like a slippery slope from "right" to free.

I think most of us will agree on the need to protect the most vulnerable among us. The distinction comes in defining "most vulnerable".

No doubt. I think regardless of your political affiliation, most people have a strong desire to help those who are in need. Where a lot of the gripe comes is, like you said, what you consider "most vulnerable."

 

[MTTiger19]

At the end of the day, the political dichotomy is so vast in this country and we all just follow along, that we end up getting screwed. Pig Boi talks all day like his insurance premiums are through the roof and they shouldn't be. Well... yeah, all of ours that have families are. Mine tripled.

Rather than coming to a bipartisan decision about the Covid era subsidies at all, none of our elected officials negotiated in good faith and could not come to a middle ground. So they got pushed out over and over, until they ran out. Rather than negotiate before they ran out, our government officials let them run out, pushing healthcare costs through the roof.

Why? So both sides could use it as a talking point for the midterms, screwing their constituents on both sides, so they could "win."

We the people suffer and it's ridiculous. Our elected officials don't have our best interest at heart and we suffer for it.

I think you’re missing the point. The government decided to get involved in private healthcare matters. They decided unilaterally that everyone deserves the same stuff regardless of whether it was earned or if it was able to be afforded. The government and specifically ACA prioritized broad access over low individual costs. They had no right to stick their noses in this. We had clinics for people that were disadvantaged.

 

[tigres88]

I think you’re missing the point. The government decided to get involved in private healthcare matters. They decided unilaterally that everyone deserves the same stuff regardless of whether it was earned or if it was able to be afforded. The government and specifically ACA prioritized broad access over low individual costs. They had no right to stick their noses in this. We had clinics for people that were disadvantaged.

Can't put the toothpaste back in the tube- we're here now, so what is the Government who is supposed to be FOR the people going to do about it?

 

[MTTiger19]

Can't put the toothpaste back in the tube- we're here now, so what is the Government who is supposed to be FOR the people going to do about it?

They need to focus on Medicare and Medicaid - those providers, institutions and patients. They have zero business in the private sector. It’s ridiculous to think otherwise. Being FOR the people doesn’t mean spoiling them and wiping peoples asses. If you’re on welfare maybe you should get your **** together before going on wegovy.

 

[bdgan]

No doubt. I think regardless of your political affiliation, most people have a strong desire to help those who are in need. Where a lot of the gripe comes is, like you said, what you consider "most vulnerable."

Where's the cut off between being "in need" vs preferring to live off the government rather than accept personal responsibility for your life?

 

[baltimorened]

Where's the cut off between being "in need" vs preferring to live off the government rather than accept personal responsibility for your life?

isn't that the problem?

 

[bdgan]

I think our "rights" expand as society grows and technology advances. I would argue that broadband internet should probably be considered a "right" since society has evolved to the point where you kind of need internet access if you want to participate in society. I also think that healthcare has probably evolved into a "right" thanks to the marked improvements in medical advancements.

Who is supposed to pay for your internet?

 

[PawPride]

Who is supposed to pay for your internet?

I mean, yeah, I think all those things should be basic rights. Not that they should be provided for free, but there should be some safeguards in place to keep the most vulnerable of our society safe and capable of being productive members of society.

I’m not looking for anything to be free, as I stated in my next post.

I look at something like Chattanooga wrt broadband services. The greater Chattanooga area (not city proper, but surrounding areas that are much more rural), about 15-18 years ago, was a broadband desert. Comcast and other providers refused to install the infrastructure to provide the locals out there with broadband services because they deemed it wasn’t worth the capex. City of Chattanooga decided to fund their own broadband infrastructure in those rural areas, provide high quality broadband to their citizens (paid for by their taxes), and it ended up being a massive success.

THAT is what I’m talking about when I look at a govt providing what I think is a basic right because private industry doesn’t think it’s worth it.

Chattanooga’s Municipal Fiber Network Has Delivered $5.3 Billion in Community Benefits, New Study Finds | Welcome to Community Networks

Since 2011, a new study finds that Chattanooga's city-owned fiber network has generated $5.3 billion in net community benefits for Hamilton County. Conducted by researchers at the University of Tennessee at Chattanooga, the study finds that the municipal fiber network has dramatically reshaped...

communitynetworks.org

 

[PawPride]

Where's the cut off between being "in need" vs preferring to live off the government rather than accept personal responsibility for your life?

I don't have a specific metric or anything in mind to quantify this, I'm just giving my opinion on things. I also don't think you should throw the baby out with the bath water trying to prevent 100% of bad actors. Perfection is the enemy of good, and I'm fine with providing support to those most in need even if that means some bad actors are going to exploit that and be lazy.

 

[dpic73]

 

[baltimorened]

I’m not looking for anything to be free, as I stated in my next post.

I look at something like Chattanooga wrt broadband services. The greater Chattanooga area (not city proper, but surrounding areas that are much more rural), about 15-18 years ago, was a broadband desert. Comcast and other providers refused to install the infrastructure to provide the locals out there with broadband services because they deemed it wasn’t worth the capex. City of Chattanooga decided to fund their own broadband infrastructure in those rural areas, provide high quality broadband to their citizens (paid for by their taxes), and it ended up being a massive success.

THAT is what I’m talking about when I look at a govt providing what I think is a basic right because private industry doesn’t think it’s worth it.

Chattanooga’s Municipal Fiber Network Has Delivered $5.3 Billion in Community Benefits, New Study Finds | Welcome to Community Networks

Since 2011, a new study finds that Chattanooga's city-owned fiber network has generated $5.3 billion in net community benefits for Hamilton County. Conducted by researchers at the University of Tennessee at Chattanooga, the study finds that the municipal fiber network has dramatically reshaped...

communitynetworks.org

there was a story...remember there were $billions appropriated for broadband specifically for this purpose..it was in one of the Biden bills, very worthwhile for the reason you cited. When Biden left office, there were few , if any, people connected.

Supposedly, I know, not very factual, but starlink offered to do the service, and could have provided the service within a month. But the administration insisted on fiber optic cable which brings a high infrastructure cost. seems like another instance where the government had a good idea, but the implementation maybe wasn't the best.

 

[TigerGrowls]

IMO very strong opinion healthcare is not a right. I think our only rights are outlined in the Bill of Rights. |We can still choose to provide for less fortunate people or even the population at large but that's what elections and bills are for. I think it's very dangerous to call it a right because that means it's not a choice of how much and how many. It means that some people have a guaranteed right to other people's labor. That's fiscal suicide. Where does it end? Is food a right? Utilities? Housing? College Education? Cell phones?

IMO the big problem is that people don't want to put a price on things like health and education. Don't provide enough subsidies and you get accused of killing people. The amount needed never ends. We used to have some doctors and some hospitals but relatively few specialists. Now you can't drive 5 miles down the road without seeing a slew of medical centers. Mental healthcare used to be minimal and now it has exploded. Whose idea was it to have insurance cover GLP-1 drugs? Try to limit federal spending on the administrative portion of university research and you're killing millions of people. Bottom line is if there can't be limits there can't be cost control.

Urgent medical care has become a defacto right in the US. Hospitals are not turning anyone down it sounds like.

 

[TigerGrowls]

I mean, yeah, I think all those things should be basic rights. Not that they should be provided for free, but there should be some safeguards in place to keep the most vulnerable of our society safe and capable of being productive members of society.

If all this stuff is a right then we will have a lot more folks just choosing not to work.

 

[MTTiger19]

Urgent medical care has become a defacto right in the US. Hospitals are not turning anyone down it sounds like.

It’s literally illegal to turn someone away from emergency care. Since 1986. If the provider or institution accepts one penny of federal funding (Medicare/Medicaid) they by law must provide care.

 

[TigerGrowls]

It’s literally illegal to turn someone away from emergency care. Since 1986. If the provider or institution accepts one penny of federal funding (Medicare/Medicaid) they by law must provide care.

So the federal govt put itself on the hook to use our taxpayer funds way back then to pay for illegals healthcare.

 

[MTTiger19]

So the federal govt put itself on the hook to use our taxpayer funds way back then to pay for illegals healthcare.

Yes. The creation of the fed and the passing of the 16th amendment were the genesis of government redistribution of wealth in America. It’s been downhill since. Here’s a quick snapshot of the progression of taxing workers.

1913 Middle/Lower Class: ~0% federal income tax burden (exempt; only ~1–4% of population paid any). The tax was explicitly not aimed at them.

Today Middle Class: Moderate burden, often 10–20% effective rate on income, but with significant relief via deductions/credits.


1913 High Earners: ~1–7% effective federal income tax burden (top marginal rate of 7% on income over $500,000 nominal—about $16 million in today’s dollars—and applied to a tiny ultra-wealthy group; most high earners paid closer to 1–2% overall due to the narrow brackets and exemptions). Very few people qualified.

Today High Earners: Higher burden, with top 1% paying an average effective federal income tax rate of ~23–26% (e.g., 23.1–26.1% in recent IRS data), and the statutory top marginal rate at 37% (plus potential 3.8% on certain investment income for some). This affects those with AGI roughly above $600,000–$700,000+, though deductions/credits lower the effective rate below the marginal.

In conclusion the government in 1913 considered earning $16 million dollars in today’s money as a “high earner”. Now that threshold has been lowered over $15.4 million dollars to $600k being a high earner. But the point remains that these people were being cared for and treated. No one is or was being turned away, that’s a lie.

 

[PawPride]

there was a story...remember there were $billions appropriated for broadband specifically for this purpose..it was in one of the Biden bills, very worthwhile for the reason you cited. When Biden left office, there were few , if any, people connected.

Supposedly, I know, not very factual, but starlink offered to do the service, and could have provided the service within a month. But the administration insisted on fiber optic cable which brings a high infrastructure cost. seems like another instance where the government had a good idea, but the implementation maybe wasn't the best.

Yeah, I think Starlink is awesome - we use it at our family property out in the middle of nowhere SC and it works well. There's one small broadband company out there that price gouges like crazy and they said it was going to take months to get us set up with internet, so we decided to go with Starlink.

I think low orbit satellite services, like Starlink, are a great way to provide internet access to those rural areas that the broadband services don't want to expand into without requiring tens of millions + to lay infrastructure.

I think ultimately we should expand fiber optic infrastructure all over these rural areas, because it's much more reliable/better quality/faster speed than satellite services - but in the interim Starlink and other similar services are perfect options.

 

[PawPride]

If all this stuff is a right then we will have a lot more folks just choosing not to work.

I mean the post you quoted literally says I don't think they should be provided for free. I consider clean drinking water a basic right and it's nowhere close to being free.

 

[TigerGrowls]

I mean the post you quoted literally says I don't think they should be provided for free. I consider clean drinking water a basic right and it's nowhere close to being free.

Drinking water is a low bar. You can drink tap water and it's pretty cheap.

 

[PawPride]

Drinking water is a low bar. You can drink tap water and it's pretty cheap.

...Who ensures that the tap water is clean enough to drink? How are POTWs and WTPs funded and maintained?

 

[TigerGrowls]

...Who ensures that the tap water is clean enough to drink? How are POTWs and WTPs funded and maintained?

I have drank tap water my whole life and im still here and doing well at 62.

 

[PawPride]

I have drank tap water my whole life and im still here and doing well at 62.

My guy, you’re 62 and don’t realize that you’re able to do that because tax funded and government operated WTPs allow for that? Why do you think Americans get sick drinking the water in Mexico and Mexicans don’t?

 

[tigres88]

My guy, you’re 62 and don’t realize that you’re able to do that because tax funded and government operated WTPs allow for that? Why do you think Americans get sick drinking the water in Mexico and Mexicans don’t?

Buddy he's a 62 year old deep into a conspiracy theorist psychosis- you really think he thinks about these things?

 

[TigerGrowls]

My guy, you’re 62 and don’t realize that you’re able to do that because tax funded and government operated WTPs allow for that? Why do you think Americans get sick drinking the water in Mexico and Mexicans don’t?

So we agree then. Drinking water is plentifully available for all Americans at next to nothing.

 

[PawPride]

So we agree then. Drinking water is plentifully available for all Americans at next to nothing.

I'm amazed that you're not getting it, but I guess I shouldn't be surprised.

 

[TigerGrowls]

I'm amazed that you're not getting it, but I guess I shouldn't be surprised.

I agree that I'm not getting your point.