Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The healthcare system is indeed toast, and with the current state of political polarization nothing will be done anytime soon.

At this point, I think (with the exception of those on Medicare, Medicaid, & Tricare) they should just provide every man, woman, and child in America with a monthly subsidy towards the healthcare solution of their choice. Enough to cover 50% of the cost of a basic HDHP for your zipcode & age(s). Put it in an HSA keeping the current spending rules in place. Same payment for every person whether they have employer healthcare, ACA, or no insurance. If you don’t need it, let it accumulate. You probably will eventually.

Tax the absolute snot out of alcohol, tobacco, other vices, & junk food/drink to raise revenue. Come up with a fair tax structure to pay for the remainder, targeting the super wealthy.

You can't use HSA to pay insurance premiums.

Could easily be changed

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The healthcare system is indeed toast, and with the current state of political polarization nothing will be done anytime soon.

At this point, I think (with the exception of those on Medicare, Medicaid, & Tricare) they should just provide every man, woman, and child in America with a monthly subsidy towards the healthcare solution of their choice. Enough to cover 50% of the cost of a basic HDHP for your zipcode & age(s). Put it in an HSA keeping the current spending rules in place. Same payment for every person whether they have employer healthcare, ACA, or no insurance. If you don’t need it, let it accumulate. You probably will eventually.

Tax the absolute snot out of alcohol, tobacco, other vices, & junk food/drink to raise revenue. Come up with a fair tax structure to pay for the remainder, targeting the super wealthy.

You can't use HSA to pay insurance premiums.

Anonymous wrote:The healthcare system is indeed toast, and with the current state of political polarization nothing will be done anytime soon.

At this point, I think (with the exception of those on Medicare, Medicaid, & Tricare) they should just provide every man, woman, and child in America with a monthly subsidy towards the healthcare solution of their choice. Enough to cover 50% of the cost of a basic HDHP for your zipcode & age(s). Put it in an HSA keeping the current spending rules in place. Same payment for every person whether they have employer healthcare, ACA, or no insurance. If you don’t need it, let it accumulate. You probably will eventually.

Tax the absolute snot out of alcohol, tobacco, other vices, & junk food/drink to raise revenue. Come up with a fair tax structure to pay for the remainder, targeting the super wealthy.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:People have to be more responsible and save their money to cover paying for health insurance and out of pocket expenses. ACA plans are still pretty reasonable and there are good plans available to most people for $500 to $1,000 per person per month, even without subsidies.

What a terribly tone deaf response. In case you haven't noticed, the cost of everything has been increasing at alarming rates while wages do not. When so many people are living paycheck to paycheck, how exactly do you expect them to have the money to cover a huge increase in healthcare costs?? For example, I have a friend who is a divorced mother of 3. Fortunately her kids are covered on their father's insurance plan. She works full time and gets health insurance through work. Her portion of the premium is increasing by nearly $500/month. She is incredibly frugal, but she doesn't have an extra $500/month so she's going to be forced to drop insurance.

Your post makes no sense. Frugality involves saving money. Your friend just sounds poor.

Anonymous wrote:The healthcare system is indeed toast, and with the current state of political polarization nothing will be done anytime soon.

At this point, I think (with the exception of those on Medicare, Medicaid, & Tricare) they should just provide every man, woman, and child in America with a monthly subsidy towards the healthcare solution of their choice. Enough to cover 50% of the cost of a basic HDHP for your zipcode & age(s). Put it in an HSA keeping the current spending rules in place. Same payment for every person whether they have employer healthcare, ACA, or no insurance. If you don’t need it, let it accumulate. You probably will eventually.

Tax the absolute snot out of alcohol, tobacco, other vices, & junk food/drink to raise revenue. Come up with a fair tax structure to pay for the remainder, targeting the super wealthy.

Anonymous wrote:Been reading a lot of stories recently on various social media platforms on the horror stories so many Americans are currently facing with respect to HC. Besides the loss of subsidies for Obamacare, so many people are now saying their HC insurance during this new round of open season is at the breaking point where it is completely unaffordable. Many people saying they now have to shell out $2000-3000 per month for coverage for their family with their *employer* plans. And that's for garbage HC plans that still require $6, 7, 10k deductibles before their insurance will pay anything. So many people are now basically saying they plan to go uninsured because HC plans are a massive ripoff and they can't afford it. They plan to pay out of pocket for what they can, but if they hit an emergency, many have said in these stories they have zero intention of paying now because it isn't affordable. They don't care if they get hits to their credit, because it isnt like they can afford $500-600k homes and $50k cars anyway.

So is HC in America finally toast? What happens when the vast majority of Americans simply decide to stop paying the outrageous costs and risk can no longer be pooled for insurance plans because huge numbers of people can't afford it anymore? The entire system for insurance will collapse. Costs keep going up, which makes fewer amd fewer people able to afford it, which causes even more people to drop causing prices to escalate even more. It is a circular problem out of control.

HC in the US may finally be over as we know it, and it feels a lot different this time.

Anonymous wrote:Didn’t read all 10 pages so maybe another DCUMer posted this…

Private equity firms are driving huge medical cost increases. They need to be stopped.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I will always remember Romney answering a health care question during a Republican debate rhetorically asking “we can’t just let them die, can we?” Members of the audience yelled, “Yes!!!!!!!”
This is the plan apparently.

The GOP has doubled down on this by discouraging vaccines in the population group which is incapable of critical thought. I assume it's a strategy to have people remove themselves.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This whole fiasco solidly proves we need universal healthcare.

It's not that easy in the US to set up, it's just not. It's a HUGE country with a lot of unhealthy people to start with. I could give you 50 reasons why it's near impossible. I'm not suggesting HC reform isn't needed or that I'm opposed to universal healthcare - it's just that the reality of putting in one in the US today is a pipe dream. It would never work.

Our entire lifestyle and beliefs profoundly differ from countries with successful existing universal HC systems. I'm not sure what would work.

Thta's true and one reason why universal health care is not a great starting place.

However, implementing a single payer system would be much easier and much less disruptive. And would largley reduce costs while freeing up doctors to doctor instead of arguing with insurance companies about whether something is medically necessary.

How would single payer reduce costs? The provider accepts whatever govt dictates? For all providers providing the same services?

Does the govt now argue whether something is medically necessary or not?

Right off the top is the money that insurance companies use for huge salaries, bonuses, private planes, shareholder retreats, profit, etc. Add on to that there is no need for broad marketing and advertising. Basic savings from having economies of scale.

As for care, Medicare already does that. And do you really want someone whose bonus is related to your claims being denied and approval for medical treatment rejected deciding whether or not you need something? Remember, your loss is their gain.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I will always remember Romney answering a health care question during a Republican debate rhetorically asking “we can’t just let them die, can we?” Members of the audience yelled, “Yes!!!!!!!”
This is the plan apparently.

The GOP has doubled down on this by discouraging vaccines in the population group which is incapable of critical thought. I assume it's a strategy to have people remove themselves.

What do you know you're not even starving.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I will always remember Romney answering a health care question during a Republican debate rhetorically asking “we can’t just let them die, can we?” Members of the audience yelled, “Yes!!!!!!!”
This is the plan apparently.

The GOP has doubled down on this by discouraging vaccines in the population group which is incapable of critical thought. I assume it's a strategy to have people remove themselves.

Anonymous wrote:There are a lot of headwinds (in addition to the expiration of the subsidies) that may be difficult for the current HC system to handle:

1) our aging population > more expensive healthcare needs as people age

2) AI eliminating the availability of jobs for younger workers > fewer younger (and usually healthier) people enrolled in workplace plans to offset the costs of older workers

3) the layering in the healthcare system with lots of different entities involved and all those entities are taking profits

To me, these headwinds are ones policymakers across the political spectrum should be paying close attention to.

Additionally, with insurance plans linked to employment, when a person moves to a new job they often move insurers. Therefore, insurers are not incentive for long-term thinking about a person's health, just optimizing the current state.

If a single payer can't come to fruition, we at least need to figure out a way to decouple insurance from employment. I think that is the source of many of our problems.