Blue Dog Suggests Medicare For All? Where Do We Sign?

what irratates me about this debate is how republicans or conservatives don't want healthcare for all, yet, do nothing to stop the state and federal government giving great healthcare plans to their employees.....plus, the people who get elected to DC enjoy awesome for life coverage....

Good point.

What surprises me about this conversation as it does in virtually all such conversations is how little people actually inform themselves.

Americans attack issues with talking points, not knowledge.
 
i am not so sure it makes everything more expensive....seems it is pretty expensive right now and if the bill comes out right, then rates will decrease for everyone as the risk is spread over a broader spectrum of society and if a government agency actually works, then insurance will get fair competition and that is good for everyone.....
Actually it makes it so you pay a fine smaller than your coverage if you don't get it, some people will hold off until they need it, insurance companies cannot refuse them, including such people in the larger group increases the cost of premiums immensely for those who carry the insurance. It makes it more expensive for everybody.
 
Actually it makes it so you pay a fine smaller than your coverage if you don't get it, some people will hold off until they need it, insurance companies cannot refuse them, including such people in the larger group increases the cost of premiums immensely for those who carry the insurance. It makes it more expensive for everybody.

Yeah so the solution is to not give those people healthcare. Good game, Damo. Good game.
 
Actually it makes it so you pay a fine smaller than your coverage if you don't get it, some people will hold off until they need it, insurance companies cannot refuse them, including such people in the larger group increases the cost of premiums immensely for those who carry the insurance. It makes it more expensive for everybody.

if there is a public option, people should get it. there is a fine if you lack auto insurance.....

as to cost in premiums....i don't think so....you will now have more people paying monthly premiums, thus spreading the risk or cost around. i simply do not see any evidence as to how it will make it more expensive for "everyone"....

who do you think pays for the ER non ER visits now? are you telling me that the way health care is today that it doesn't cost everyone? that it is cheaper now?
 
Yeah so the solution is to not give those people healthcare. Good game, Damo. Good game.
:rolleyes:

The "solution" is to allow real competition, not pretend to make up fraudulent competition and to control costs not create larger ones. The solution is not simply attempting to force people into a program that increases costs because it is so poorly designed at its inception.

When the companies can pay a $400 fine for not providing insurance for you and forcing you into the "co-ops" (public option), and the fines for not carrying insurance is less than the premiums to begin with, you create at inception a system that will increase costs immensely or one that will bankrupt us as many take advantage of the poorly created rubbish designed to create the "single-payer" system that was consistently stated as the goal of any program created by Pelosi, et al.

The Baucus bill is far worse than 3200 thought of being and that one was bad enough to cause fits. It is a poorly concealed attempt to create what they cannot create through legislation by creating incentive to push people into the "co-ops"...

The CBO report assumes that companies will actually increase pay when they drop the insurance, yet the bill doesn't incentivize it at all. The reality is it denies the nature of corporations that we all see today. It's crap, it won't pay for itself, it increases costs, and it removes any chance at real competition and price control.
 
That's why corporations are penalized for not providing insurance. They don't gain either way.

And co-ops are in no way, shape, or form a public option. I swear you're just making shit up these days damo.
 
That's why corporations are penalized for not providing insurance. They don't gain either way.

And co-ops are in no way, shape, or form a public option. I swear you're just making shit up these days damo.
Again. I'll type slowly this time.

The. Penalty. Is. About. $400. Dollars. The. cost. of. the. insurance. is. well. over. that. cost. sometimes. as. much. as. $8,000 to $10,000 per year. If you had the choice between those two as a member of the board on a corporation, and knew that they would have to buy their own from the exchange with only that $400 damage to you... What would you most likely do? Think as you have seen corporations act, not what you somehow think you would do, and remember it is the LAW that they act in the best interest of the corporation....

And co-ops are public option lite, and can easily be taken over when "costs of healthcare" cause people to cry out for reform... again. This "plan" is designed to fail miserably, either purposefully or just through ineptitude (probably from rejecting every common sense idea that would curb the problems offered by a different party), and we should reject it vehemently.
 
That was a creative legislator pander. They responded to criticisms about the fines severity, and decided to reduce it to useless levels and have it a fine on the corporations instead. Yeah, that undermines the whole point of the thing.

If people can't are being fined who can't afford health insurance, something is clearly wrong with the level of subsidization. I would, honestly, prefer universal subsidization, as that clears the whole mess up.
 
Back
Top