How would you feel about losing your company-provided health insurance for "medicare for all"?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I’m just very wary about how any of these plans will be paid for, TBH. HHI 300K ish, both self employed, 2DC. We’ve bought our own insurance forever, and have bought in the exchange since the beginning. We pay 20/25K per year (premiums and deductibles- don’t usually meet deductible). It seems like a lot to me already. I fear we will end up paying even more- perhaps FAR more- for care that will be equal or lesser. I doubt it will be better than what we have now?

I just haven’t seen enough about price/cost controls. I’ve read very mixed ideas about how this will be paid for. I’m wary because we have been told this before (it will be cheaper overall, etc etc) and so far we have only paid more and more and more per year. I’m guessing at 300k we will end up paying even more than now. Hope I’m wrong about that.

The exchange is not a good barometer of how much universal care would costs and achieved not of the economies thanks to the cutting of the ACA by the GOP combined with the ceaseless profiteering by insurers and providers.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Voting for Warren or Biden anyone that ensures not one person goes bankrupt due to medical bills. Health insurance should be a given. For all. Pay private if you want but no family should lose their house due to cancer or chronic $$ Illness of child or spouse

this

...is a Russian bot.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Voting for Warren or Biden anyone that ensures not one person goes bankrupt due to medical bills. Health insurance should be a given. For all. Pay private if you want but no family should lose their house due to cancer or chronic $$ Illness of child or spouse

this

...is a Russian bot.

I’m definitely not a Russian not and believe with everything the PP said.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Voting for Warren or Biden anyone that ensures not one person goes bankrupt due to medical bills. Health insurance should be a given. For all. Pay private if you want but no family should lose their house due to cancer or chronic $$ Illness of child or spouse

this

...is a Russian bot.

No. That is me. Sorry.

I agree with that poster and I will vote. No one should go bankrupt because they have a sick child. No one.

[Anonymous]

Again I am not a Bot. I wrote that. I am a parent, a healthcare worker, and a Democrat. Medicare for all. Why would I be a Bot? That is just weird? Republicans...

[Anonymous]

No great mystery here. Medicare For All will work the same as Medicare for those in the workplace over 65 now. The employer will most likely offer a supplemental plan.

[Anonymous]

In my area, there was an UMC family who went bankrupt after their child's illness caused bills that exceeded the lifetime max.

Thank goodness the GOP hasn't stripped that back out again, like they tried to do (while saying they weren't).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Again I am not a Bot. I wrote that. I am a parent, a healthcare worker, and a Democrat. Medicare for all. Why would I be a Bot? That is just weird? Republicans...

Because people here are having meaningful conversations, and you just show up with some random bullet point copied from Warren's website.

Let me ask you: What was your last serious medical condition and how did you pay to have it addressed?

[Anonymous]

I have had two health conditions treated under ACA which we pay a lot monthly for. I have not even visited Warrens site but just so you know MANY people in the healthcare field are FOR Medicare for all. Look into it—we see where the $$ goes now in the hospitals—to the executives and the huge companies that buy and take over hospitals. Than look at big pharma.

[Anonymous]

OK! I just had a brilliant idea to help hold down costs and introduce transparency into doctor's fees - and whch could be easily enacted.(I'm the PP upthread who can't get the upfront price for a small procedure I need and therefore can't determine whether I should wait for Medicare age or do it now.)

I think we all agree that this nonsense we hear from doctors ("I can't tell you my fee ....you'll just have to wait until insurance processes the bill after the fact") is absolutely insane. But if you're on Medicare, it's no secret what doctors are reimbursed. There are published schedules that give the reimbursement of every conceivable exam, treatment, and procedure.

So what if we require that doctors disclose their fees using the Medicare reimbursement as the benchmark? Doctors are free to set their own rates - no price fixing - but they must let you know their charges relative to the standard Medicare fee. So.....you could have a doctor saying (to non-Medicare patients, obviously) that he/she charges 125% of Medicare rate, or. 145%, or whatever. And it wouldn't have to be standard across-the-board, either. The doctor could say that procedure to do ABC is 125% Medicare, and the XYZ procedure is 150%, etc.

The benefits are multi-faceted. FIrst, consumers would know the max what they would be charged ( before insurance kicks in). Two, it would create pricing competition among providers, which is a good thing. And third, because of the competition in pricing, costs would come down.

So....who wants to vote for MOI?

[Anonymous]

Any physicians around DCUM care to opine?

[Anonymous]

Why are people so convinced that healthcare drives health outcomes? Variety of factors go into health outcomes—especially factors generally outside of the healthcare system like diet, exercise and stress levels.

Has anybody actually shown that access to healthcare will cause health outcomes to improve. The worst possible case would be Euro costs/access and American outcomes.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Any physicians around DCUM care to opine?

I have been doing so.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Why are people so convinced that healthcare drives health outcomes? Variety of factors go into health outcomes—especially factors generally outside of the healthcare system like diet, exercise and stress levels.

Has anybody actually shown that access to healthcare will cause health outcomes to improve. The worst possible case would be Euro costs/access and American outcomes.

But the default cannot be that universal coverage will automatically lead to bad outcomes. I have no quibble with raising other concerns at play, but what I see -- over and over -- is that those with this viewpoint either don't know the outcomes data, or they are deliberately misstating it.

Fine. Say, "yes, the survival rate for X is better in these other countries, but …" Don't say "they leave preemies to die" or "you can't get bypass surgery over 80." Make an actual, real case for your argument, dammit.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why are people so convinced that healthcare drives health outcomes? Variety of factors go into health outcomes—especially factors generally outside of the healthcare system like diet, exercise and stress levels.

Has anybody actually shown that access to healthcare will cause health outcomes to improve. The worst possible case would be Euro costs/access and American outcomes.

But the default cannot be that universal coverage will automatically lead to bad outcomes. I have no quibble with raising other concerns at play, but what I see -- over and over -- is that those with this viewpoint either don't know the outcomes data, or they are deliberately misstating it.

Fine. Say, "yes, the survival rate for X is better in these other countries, but …" Don't say "they leave preemies to die" or "you can't get bypass surgery over 80." Make an actual, real case for your argument, dammit.

The problem with outcomes data is that it pertains to the population as a whole not to outcomes for you or your children or those who are close to you.

I have an older child with two illnesses that are significant but usually not life threatening that took four years to diagnose through a huge amount of persistence on my part. My alternative to this was to resign myself to having a child who would be a permanent charge unable to go to school or work.

The illnesses are not common but do not qualify as rare. There are objective tests for these illnesses; they are not borderline clinically diagnosed illnesses like chronic Lyme or fibromyalgia. (Had to add that.)

I am on boards for these illnesses and Canadians have a very challenging time getting medical care for them as do those dependent on the NHS.

In population outcomes data the fact that my child would have very low quality of life would not matter at all. But, guess what? My child and their quality of life matters to me.