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

[Anonymous]

OP are you trying to distract from the Impeachment news? You keep swinging your my healthcare is best hammer and talking down Medicare for all? You are way behind the newscycle?
Impeach Trump vote Dem Medicare for all starting with buying keep your private insurance at first

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Jeez can we take the politics out of this for one minute and actually have a conversation here

We need to do 2 things

1. Address the moral hazard problem. There needs to be penalties/consequences for poor health behavior poor diet, smoking, not exercising or rewards (lower premiums) for positive behavior
2. Bring back catastrophic plans

Most people are satisfied with their health insurance. Scrapping a system that over 100 million people are happy with makes absolutely no sense.

You seem to ignore the large gap in between. What then? People get sick even if they live healthy lives?

Catastrophic plans don't address things like getting mammograms, a lumpectomy (benign, which I've had). It doesn't address congenital issues like asthma.

The vast majority of people fall in the large gap you keep ignoring.

Not only do they get sick, they also get hit by buses, bitten by dogs, ride in airplanes with people carrying diseases, etc

Under Obamacare you pay for all that anyway because you have a deductible of at least 5k (unsubsidized)

That's the same as a catastrophic plan except you are paying 30 a month instead of 300

It'd even worse than that - try $800+. That's what you'll pay for the "bargain" bronze plan if you're over 60 - and you'll still have a $6k deductible.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:


Agreed.

Amazingly, Warren and Sanders have said that Medicare for All would imclude illegal immigrants.

There's no way such a thing works, ever.

Elaborate please. What benefits would the Warren/Sanders plans provide to illegal immigrants and under what circumstances?

If they're saying that under their plan, ERs will treat motor vehicle accident victims, then I don't see the problem. If they're saying that their plan will provide illegal immigrants with 20 years of cancer treatments, then that's problematic.

Sanders and Warren have explicitly said that the "for all" part includes undocumented immigrants, same as everyone else.

Citation? I don't think they said anything this sweeping.

Widely reported -- just google it.

Despite current polling, I really just don’t see Warren (and def. not Sanders) as the nominee. Warren would make a great cabinet secretary.

She could be Secretary of Free Stuff. IF a Dem wins, it will be the biggest agency of all.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Sanders and Warren have explicitly said that the "for all" part includes undocumented immigrants, same as everyone else.

Citation? I don't think they said anything this sweeping.

Widely reported -- just google it.

No results found for warren healthcare "exactly the same for illegal immigrants"

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I fear change, and I'm sure in the end it would be fine - and probably lead to a better, healthier society overall

I used to not support Warren because I thought her healthcare plan went too far but now I just want someone who isn't corruptable, and if we have to get universal healthcare along with that so be it

And I say that as someone who is genuinely happy with my private, employer-provided health insurance

I am in a similar state. I am happy with my employer-provided health insurance, but the arguments for single payer are plausible.

But I would like to see small steps first before I am willing to support universal healthcare. I think the best first small step would be to provide universal healthcare for children.
1. Children are generally healthy so the costs would be low
2. Coverage for children may save costs down the road by catching problems early
3. Companies would no longer need to provide family coverage, so it is a first step in the move away from employer provided health care.

After this step, **if it works**, we can do followup steps, e.g. extending coverage to age 26, or lowering Medicare eligibility to age 62

I can see a 100 ways that a too rapid transition to universal health care would be a disaster.

Most sensible post on this thread.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:OP are you trying to distract from the Impeachment news? You keep swinging your my healthcare is best hammer and talking down Medicare for all? You are way behind the newscycle?
Impeach Trump vote Dem Medicare for all starting with buying keep your private insurance at first

Wow -- time for therapy.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I fear change, and I'm sure in the end it would be fine - and probably lead to a better, healthier society overall

I used to not support Warren because I thought her healthcare plan went too far but now I just want someone who isn't corruptable, and if we have to get universal healthcare along with that so be it

And I say that as someone who is genuinely happy with my private, employer-provided health insurance

I am in a similar state. I am happy with my employer-provided health insurance, but the arguments for single payer are plausible.

But I would like to see small steps first before I am willing to support universal healthcare. I think the best first small step would be to provide universal healthcare for children.
1. Children are generally healthy so the costs would be low
2. Coverage for children may save costs down the road by catching problems early
3. Companies would no longer need to provide family coverage, so it is a first step in the move away from employer provided health care.

After this step, **if it works**, we can do followup steps, e.g. extending coverage to age 26, or lowering Medicare eligibility to age 62

I can see a 100 ways that a too rapid transition to universal health care would be a disaster.

Most sensible post on this thread.

+2

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Jeez can we take the politics out of this for one minute and actually have a conversation here

We need to do 2 things

1. Address the moral hazard problem. There needs to be penalties/consequences for poor health behavior poor diet, smoking, not exercising or rewards (lower premiums) for positive behavior
2. Bring back catastrophic plans

Most people are satisfied with their health insurance. Scrapping a system that over 100 million people are happy with makes absolutely no sense.

You seem to ignore the large gap in between. What then? People get sick even if they live healthy lives?

Catastrophic plans don't address things like getting mammograms, a lumpectomy (benign, which I've had). It doesn't address congenital issues like asthma.

The vast majority of people fall in the large gap you keep ignoring.

Not only do they get sick, they also get hit by buses, bitten by dogs, ride in airplanes with people carrying diseases, etc

Under Obamacare you pay for all that anyway because you have a deductible of at least 5k (unsubsidized)

That's the same as a catastrophic plan except you are paying 30 a month instead of 300

It'd even worse than that - try $800+. That's what you'll pay for the "bargain" bronze plan if you're over 60 - and you'll still have a $6k deductible.

Yup.

A scam.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Jeez can we take the politics out of this for one minute and actually have a conversation here

We need to do 2 things

1. Address the moral hazard problem. There needs to be penalties/consequences for poor health behavior poor diet, smoking, not exercising or rewards (lower premiums) for positive behavior
2. Bring back catastrophic plans

Most people are satisfied with their health insurance. Scrapping a system that over 100 million people are happy with makes absolutely no sense.

You seem to ignore the large gap in between. What then? People get sick even if they live healthy lives?

Catastrophic plans don't address things like getting mammograms, a lumpectomy (benign, which I've had). It doesn't address congenital issues like asthma.

The vast majority of people fall in the large gap you keep ignoring.

Not only do they get sick, they also get hit by buses, bitten by dogs, ride in airplanes with people carrying diseases, etc

Under Obamacare you pay for all that anyway because you have a deductible of at least 5k (unsubsidized)

That's the same as a catastrophic plan except you are paying 30 a month instead of 300

Exactly.

Too many posters here are not very good at math.

at least with ACA people have some coverage. Our well checks are free. Also, when you have a catastrophic illness, the cost goes waaay beyond your $10K deductible. You can easily hit $250k+.

I can't believe people are this stupid. That's the whole point of catastrophic it kicks in and covers after the deductible. It's even worse with Obamacare 800 a month vs 30-50 bucks for most catastrophic plans all for what a free doctor's visit. That doctor's visit sure isn't worth the extra thousands you are paying per year.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Jeez can we take the politics out of this for one minute and actually have a conversation here

We need to do 2 things

1. Address the moral hazard problem. There needs to be penalties/consequences for poor health behavior poor diet, smoking, not exercising or rewards (lower premiums) for positive behavior
2. Bring back catastrophic plans

Most people are satisfied with their health insurance. Scrapping a system that over 100 million people are happy with makes absolutely no sense.

You seem to ignore the large gap in between. What then? People get sick even if they live healthy lives?

Catastrophic plans don't address things like getting mammograms, a lumpectomy (benign, which I've had). It doesn't address congenital issues like asthma.

The vast majority of people fall in the large gap you keep ignoring.

Not only do they get sick, they also get hit by buses, bitten by dogs, ride in airplanes with people carrying diseases, etc

Under Obamacare you pay for all that anyway because you have a deductible of at least 5k (unsubsidized)

That's the same as a catastrophic plan except you are paying 30 a month instead of 300

Exactly.

Too many posters here are not very good at math.

at least with ACA people have some coverage. Our well checks are free. Also, when you have a catastrophic illness, the cost goes waaay beyond your $10K deductible. You can easily hit $250k+.

I can't believe people are this stupid. That's the whole point of catastrophic it kicks in and covers after the deductible. It's even worse with Obamacare 800 a month vs 30-50 bucks for most catastrophic plans all for what a free doctor's visit. That doctor's visit sure isn't worth the extra thousands you are paying per year.

People ARE that stupid.

Obama was an excellent salesman.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Jeez can we take the politics out of this for one minute and actually have a conversation here

We need to do 2 things

1. Address the moral hazard problem. There needs to be penalties/consequences for poor health behavior poor diet, smoking, not exercising or rewards (lower premiums) for positive behavior
2. Bring back catastrophic plans

Most people are satisfied with their health insurance. Scrapping a system that over 100 million people are happy with makes absolutely no sense.

You seem to ignore the large gap in between. What then? People get sick even if they live healthy lives?

Catastrophic plans don't address things like getting mammograms, a lumpectomy (benign, which I've had). It doesn't address congenital issues like asthma.

The vast majority of people fall in the large gap you keep ignoring.

Not only do they get sick, they also get hit by buses, bitten by dogs, ride in airplanes with people carrying diseases, etc

Under Obamacare you pay for all that anyway because you have a deductible of at least 5k (unsubsidized)

That's the same as a catastrophic plan except you are paying 30 a month instead of 300

It'd even worse than that - try $800+. That's what you'll pay for the "bargain" bronze plan if you're over 60 - and you'll still have a $6k deductible.

Yup.

A scam.

Now imagine not having ANY insurance and how much you will end up paying if you get sick.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Jeez can we take the politics out of this for one minute and actually have a conversation here

We need to do 2 things

1. Address the moral hazard problem. There needs to be penalties/consequences for poor health behavior poor diet, smoking, not exercising or rewards (lower premiums) for positive behavior
2. Bring back catastrophic plans

Most people are satisfied with their health insurance. Scrapping a system that over 100 million people are happy with makes absolutely no sense.

You seem to ignore the large gap in between. What then? People get sick even if they live healthy lives?

Catastrophic plans don't address things like getting mammograms, a lumpectomy (benign, which I've had). It doesn't address congenital issues like asthma.

The vast majority of people fall in the large gap you keep ignoring.

Not only do they get sick, they also get hit by buses, bitten by dogs, ride in airplanes with people carrying diseases, etc

Under Obamacare you pay for all that anyway because you have a deductible of at least 5k (unsubsidized)

That's the same as a catastrophic plan except you are paying 30 a month instead of 300

It'd even worse than that - try $800+. That's what you'll pay for the "bargain" bronze plan if you're over 60 - and you'll still have a $6k deductible.

Yup.

A scam.

Now imagine not having ANY insurance and how much you will end up paying if you get sick.

because people were too dumb to get catastrophic insurance on their own so now the rest of us have to pay 10 times or more per month for the same type of high deductible plan?!?!?!?

I'm tempted to take a lower paying job so I get subsidizes

This is the point folks the democratic ideas are going to screw the actual middle class. The poor get free stuff, the rich can afford to subsidize the free stuff but the middle class sure can't

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Jeez can we take the politics out of this for one minute and actually have a conversation here

We need to do 2 things

1. Address the moral hazard problem. There needs to be penalties/consequences for poor health behavior poor diet, smoking, not exercising or rewards (lower premiums) for positive behavior
2. Bring back catastrophic plans

Most people are satisfied with their health insurance. Scrapping a system that over 100 million people are happy with makes absolutely no sense.

You seem to ignore the large gap in between. What then? People get sick even if they live healthy lives?

Catastrophic plans don't address things like getting mammograms, a lumpectomy (benign, which I've had). It doesn't address congenital issues like asthma.

The vast majority of people fall in the large gap you keep ignoring.

Not only do they get sick, they also get hit by buses, bitten by dogs, ride in airplanes with people carrying diseases, etc

Under Obamacare you pay for all that anyway because you have a deductible of at least 5k (unsubsidized)

That's the same as a catastrophic plan except you are paying 30 a month instead of 300

Exactly.

Too many posters here are not very good at math.

at least with ACA people have some coverage. Our well checks are free. Also, when you have a catastrophic illness, the cost goes waaay beyond your $10K deductible. You can easily hit $250k+.

I can't believe people are this stupid. That's the whole point of catastrophic it kicks in and covers after the deductible. It's even worse with Obamacare 800 a month vs 30-50 bucks for most catastrophic plans all for what a free doctor's visit. That doctor's visit sure isn't worth the extra thousands you are paying per year.

I think you are the dumb one to not even understand how catastrophic plans work in the marketplace. The catastrophic plans you are referring to don't cover everything. ACA plans, even the high deductible ones, cover all illnesses, including pre-exsting conditions. Catastrophic plans do not.

Catastrophic health coverage is different from accident, critical illness, or short-term plans; these types of coverage tend to protect the policyholder in specific, limited situations. For example, critical illness plans insure the policyholder against specific health illnesses

https://www.ehealthinsurance.com/health-plans/catastrophic-insurance

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Jeez can we take the politics out of this for one minute and actually have a conversation here

We need to do 2 things

1. Address the moral hazard problem. There needs to be penalties/consequences for poor health behavior poor diet, smoking, not exercising or rewards (lower premiums) for positive behavior
2. Bring back catastrophic plans

Most people are satisfied with their health insurance. Scrapping a system that over 100 million people are happy with makes absolutely no sense.

You seem to ignore the large gap in between. What then? People get sick even if they live healthy lives?

Catastrophic plans don't address things like getting mammograms, a lumpectomy (benign, which I've had). It doesn't address congenital issues like asthma.

The vast majority of people fall in the large gap you keep ignoring.

Not only do they get sick, they also get hit by buses, bitten by dogs, ride in airplanes with people carrying diseases, etc

Under Obamacare you pay for all that anyway because you have a deductible of at least 5k (unsubsidized)

That's the same as a catastrophic plan except you are paying 30 a month instead of 300

It'd even worse than that - try $800+. That's what you'll pay for the "bargain" bronze plan if you're over 60 - and you'll still have a $6k deductible.

Yup.

A scam.

Now imagine not having ANY insurance and how much you will end up paying if you get sick.

because people were too dumb to get catastrophic insurance on their own so now the rest of us have to pay 10 times or more per month for the same type of high deductible plan?!?!?!?

I'm tempted to take a lower paying job so I get subsidizes

This is the point folks the democratic ideas are going to screw the actual middle class. The poor get free stuff, the rich can afford to subsidize the free stuff but the middle class sure can't

+ a million

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Jeez can we take the politics out of this for one minute and actually have a conversation here

We need to do 2 things

1. Address the moral hazard problem. There needs to be penalties/consequences for poor health behavior poor diet, smoking, not exercising or rewards (lower premiums) for positive behavior
2. Bring back catastrophic plans

Most people are satisfied with their health insurance. Scrapping a system that over 100 million people are happy with makes absolutely no sense.

You seem to ignore the large gap in between. What then? People get sick even if they live healthy lives?

Catastrophic plans don't address things like getting mammograms, a lumpectomy (benign, which I've had). It doesn't address congenital issues like asthma.

The vast majority of people fall in the large gap you keep ignoring.

Not only do they get sick, they also get hit by buses, bitten by dogs, ride in airplanes with people carrying diseases, etc

Under Obamacare you pay for all that anyway because you have a deductible of at least 5k (unsubsidized)

That's the same as a catastrophic plan except you are paying 30 a month instead of 300

It'd even worse than that - try $800+. That's what you'll pay for the "bargain" bronze plan if you're over 60 - and you'll still have a $6k deductible.

Yup.

A scam.

Now imagine not having ANY insurance and how much you will end up paying if you get sick.

because people were too dumb to get catastrophic insurance on their own so now the rest of us have to pay 10 times or more per month for the same type of high deductible plan?!?!?!?

I'm tempted to take a lower paying job so I get subsidizes

This is the point folks the democratic ideas are going to screw the actual middle class. The poor get free stuff, the rich can afford to subsidize the free stuff but the middle class sure can't

And so what did Rs come up with to help the middle class? I keep saying it over and over.. Rs have done nothing for you. Dems at least tried. All Rs do is whine.

If you want to fix the cost, then tell your representative to regulate the costs. Short of expanding medicare, that's the only way to bring down costs.