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

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’m fine with it. My company does it automatically now when you hit 65 and offers a raise and supplemental policy. Everyone is happy with it.

Everyone is THRILLED with it -- including your company.

I can't wait for M4A.

Yeah, they get to not have to pay for healthcare benefits, while nothing anywhere requires them to give a raise that would be anything close to what the health benefits were worth! Companies would be happy! They get to save an extra 20k per employee.

What makes anyone think their company is going to give them a raise if m4a comes into existence? Because all companies are notoriously generous to their employees, and don’t cut costs wherever they can?...

Wait -- so you are arguing against free healthcare because you would rather have your company pay insurers $20K a year for crappy health care?

Do you think you're getting a raise?

Heck no.

Will feds get a raise, heck no.

I have awesome healthcare, for me m4a is a no go. If you have a crappy plan or no employer sponsored healthcare I get the attraction, but no thabks unless fedgov is giving me an equivalent 20k benefit after tax.

I have a hard enough time getting employees now when we are competing with Google for talent.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’m fine with it. My company does it automatically now when you hit 65 and offers a raise and supplemental policy. Everyone is happy with it.

Everyone is THRILLED with it -- including your company.

I can't wait for M4A.

Yeah, they get to not have to pay for healthcare benefits, while nothing anywhere requires them to give a raise that would be anything close to what the health benefits were worth! Companies would be happy! They get to save an extra 20k per employee.

What makes anyone think their company is going to give them a raise if m4a comes into existence? Because all companies are notoriously generous to their employees, and don’t cut costs wherever they can?...

Wait -- so you are arguing against free healthcare because you would rather have your company pay insurers $20K a year for crappy health care?

Do you think you're getting a raise?

Heck no.

Will feds get a raise, heck no.

I have awesome healthcare, for me m4a is a no go. If you have a crappy plan or no employer sponsored healthcare I get the attraction, but no thabks unless fedgov is giving me an equivalent 20k benefit after tax.

I have a hard enough time getting employees now when we are competing with Google for talent.

This thing is getting crazier by the day.

People expect that, once Warren abolishes private health insurance, that they will a) get some magical public insurance right away, and free, and with a comparable network of providers?, AND b) a $20-30k salary raise, as companies supposedly don't have to pay for healthcare any more??

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’m fine with it. My company does it automatically now when you hit 65 and offers a raise and supplemental policy. Everyone is happy with it.

Everyone is THRILLED with it -- including your company.

I can't wait for M4A.

Yeah, they get to not have to pay for healthcare benefits, while nothing anywhere requires them to give a raise that would be anything close to what the health benefits were worth! Companies would be happy! They get to save an extra 20k per employee.

What makes anyone think their company is going to give them a raise if m4a comes into existence? Because all companies are notoriously generous to their employees, and don’t cut costs wherever they can?...

Wait -- so you are arguing against free healthcare because you would rather have your company pay insurers $20K a year for crappy health care?

Do you think you're getting a raise?

Heck no.

Will feds get a raise, heck no.

I have awesome healthcare, for me m4a is a no go. If you have a crappy plan or no employer sponsored healthcare I get the attraction, but no thabks unless fedgov is giving me an equivalent 20k benefit after tax.

I have a hard enough time getting employees now when we are competing with Google for talent.

This thing is getting crazier by the day.

People expect that, once Warren abolishes private health insurance, that they will a) get some magical public insurance right away, and free, and with a comparable network of providers?, AND b) a $20-30k salary raise, as companies supposedly don't have to pay for healthcare any more??

We will pay for health insurance with more payroll taxes. Instead of paying and administering insurance themselves, companies will get taxed the same amount for the gov't to handle it. Nobody is getting major raises. We are just shifting who is the primary payer of the care.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’m fine with it. My company does it automatically now when you hit 65 and offers a raise and supplemental policy. Everyone is happy with it.

Everyone is THRILLED with it -- including your company.

I can't wait for M4A.

Yeah, they get to not have to pay for healthcare benefits, while nothing anywhere requires them to give a raise that would be anything close to what the health benefits were worth! Companies would be happy! They get to save an extra 20k per employee.

What makes anyone think their company is going to give them a raise if m4a comes into existence? Because all companies are notoriously generous to their employees, and don’t cut costs wherever they can?...

Wait -- so you are arguing against free healthcare because you would rather have your company pay insurers $20K a year for crappy health care?

Do you think you're getting a raise?

Heck no.

Will feds get a raise, heck no.

I have awesome healthcare, for me m4a is a no go. If you have a crappy plan or no employer sponsored healthcare I get the attraction, but no thabks unless fedgov is giving me an equivalent 20k benefit after tax.

I have a hard enough time getting employees now when we are competing with Google for talent.

This thing is getting crazier by the day.

People expect that, once Warren abolishes private health insurance, that they will a) get some magical public insurance right away, and free, and with a comparable network of providers?, AND b) a $20-30k salary raise, as companies supposedly don't have to pay for healthcare any more??

We will pay for health insurance with more payroll taxes. Instead of paying and administering insurance themselves, companies will get taxed the same amount for the gov't to handle it. Nobody is getting major raises. We are just shifting who is the primary payer of the care.

Isn't that who is the primary writer of the checks? Employees/ taxpayers still paying for it when you get down to it.

[Anonymous]

I’m okay with it, but I have a child with a genetic health condition. It would be a short term loss for me, but a long term gain for my kids.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I’m okay with it, but I have a child with a genetic health condition. It would be a short term loss for me, but a long term gain for my kids.

Ugh! I have one too and am not counting on anything from M4A. They will be very preoccupied with overall health statistics and focusing on reducing the large risks like diabetes and heart disease. (Not that this is bad.)

They will not be into providing expensive treatments for those with rare genetic diseases and will have little incentive to even diagnose them. My best hope is that the genetic disease my child has is of special interest to the NIH because it can shed light on some of the larger disease groups.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’m fine with it. My company does it automatically now when you hit 65 and offers a raise and supplemental policy. Everyone is happy with it.

Everyone is THRILLED with it -- including your company.

I can't wait for M4A.

Yeah, they get to not have to pay for healthcare benefits, while nothing anywhere requires them to give a raise that would be anything close to what the health benefits were worth! Companies would be happy! They get to save an extra 20k per employee.

What makes anyone think their company is going to give them a raise if m4a comes into existence? Because all companies are notoriously generous to their employees, and don’t cut costs wherever they can?...

Wait -- so you are arguing against free healthcare because you would rather have your company pay insurers $20K a year for crappy health care?

Do you think you're getting a raise?

Heck no.

Will feds get a raise, heck no.

I have awesome healthcare, for me m4a is a no go. If you have a crappy plan or no employer sponsored healthcare I get the attraction, but no thabks unless fedgov is giving me an equivalent 20k benefit after tax.

I have a hard enough time getting employees now when we are competing with Google for talent.

This thing is getting crazier by the day.

People expect that, once Warren abolishes private health insurance, that they will a) get some magical public insurance right away, and free, and with a comparable network of providers?, AND b) a $20-30k salary raise, as companies supposedly don't have to pay for healthcare any more??

We will pay for health insurance with more payroll taxes. Instead of paying and administering insurance themselves, companies will get taxed the same amount for the gov't to handle it. Nobody is getting major raises. We are just shifting who is the primary payer of the care.

Companies are already paying for healthcare.

If they have to pay MORE, for MORE PEOPLE, guess what.

They will have to cut costs somehow. Either by firing people/ hiring fewer people in the future, or by paying less.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’m okay with it, but I have a child with a genetic health condition. It would be a short term loss for me, but a long term gain for my kids.

Ugh! I have one too and am not counting on anything from M4A. They will be very preoccupied with overall health statistics and focusing on reducing the large risks like diabetes and heart disease. (Not that this is bad.)

They will not be into providing expensive treatments for those with rare genetic diseases and will have little incentive to even diagnose them. My best hope is that the genetic disease my child has is of special interest to the NIH because it can shed light on some of the larger disease groups.

DP.. does medicare today not cover rare genetic diseases? If it does today, I don't see why it wouldn't cover it if we had M4A. But, it may mean it's not 100% covered.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’m okay with it, but I have a child with a genetic health condition. It would be a short term loss for me, but a long term gain for my kids.

Ugh! I have one too and am not counting on anything from M4A. They will be very preoccupied with overall health statistics and focusing on reducing the large risks like diabetes and heart disease. (Not that this is bad.)

They will not be into providing expensive treatments for those with rare genetic diseases and will have little incentive to even diagnose them. My best hope is that the genetic disease my child has is of special interest to the NIH because it can shed light on some of the larger disease groups.

DP.. does medicare today not cover rare genetic diseases? If it does today, I don't see why it wouldn't cover it if we had M4A. But, it may mean it's not 100% covered.

Poster with kid with genetic condition here. No idea what the other poster was referring to, maybe they don’t cover experimental procedures. My kid’s condition is rare, but requires occasional surgeries and regular checkups to keep her in good health. Our insurance is good, but expensive. We spend a lot on copays though due to surgeries. My concern is reinstatement of insurance companies being able to exclude pre-existing conditions. It also limits her employment options after she’s off mine. I’ve had friends with cancer where their employer tried make it very difficult for them to stay because she was expensive.

[Anonymous]

Again, why isn’t medical care a right? Why do the lives of the rich matter more than the lives of the poor? Why is medical care a for profit-industry?

This is wrong: https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7987501/Residents-small-Kansas-town-jailed-unpaid-medical-bills.html


People should not be jailed for unpaid medical bills.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I’m okay with it, but I have a child with a genetic health condition. It would be a short term loss for me, but a long term gain for my kids.

Exactly. I never want my kids to worry about maternal care in the future or my grandchildren (in the far future) to worry about healthcare. It should be M4All

[Anonymous]

What happens when your children can't get any health care?

My DH is a fed, and we have great healthcare. But I have to think about my children. What if they are not feds?

[Anonymous]

Nope. Not gonna happen.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Again, why isn’t medical care a right? Why do the lives of the rich matter more than the lives of the poor? Why is medical care a for profit-industry?

This is wrong: https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7987501/Residents-small-Kansas-town-jailed-unpaid-medical-bills.html


People should not be jailed for unpaid medical bills.

The banality of conservative evil:



"According to ProPublica, Judge David Casement (pictured) is a cattle rancher who was appointed a magistrate judge, despite never taking a single course in law. In Kansas, judges don’t need a law degree to preside over cases like these"

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Again, why isn’t medical care a right? Why do the lives of the rich matter more than the lives of the poor? Why is medical care a for profit-industry?

This is wrong: https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7987501/Residents-small-Kansas-town-jailed-unpaid-medical-bills.html


People should not be jailed for unpaid medical bills.

The banality of conservative evil:



"According to ProPublica, Judge David Casement (pictured) is a cattle rancher who was appointed a magistrate judge, despite never taking a single course in law. In Kansas, judges don’t need a law degree to preside over cases like these"

Here’s your deadbeat dad who belongs in jail:

Between both of his jobs, Tres was working 70 hours per week and taking their son to chemotherapy.

In doing all of that, he missed two court appearances over the medical bill. He was then arrested for failing to appear in court. His bail was set at $500.

Over the next few years, the Biggs family was sued multiple times by the hospital until their debt had accrued to more than $70,000 in medical expenses, forcing them to file for bankruptcy.

Apparently the GOP only cares for fetuses. Kids with leukemia are bad hombres.