• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

This Is Medicare For All

ttwtt78640 said:
I would like to see a bill making current Medicare have no premiums, deductibles or co-pays and to offer the "complete" coverage that M4A is supposed to offer funded entirely by an increase in the FICA payroll tax just to let folks have some idea as to the (equally shared?) cost of a M4A system.
Click to expand...

While I'm OK with increasing FICA taxes, I think there should be premiums and out of pocket costs. Preventable care is one thing, constant hypochondriacs mucking up the system is another. I don't want to wait one year for an appointment because everyone is going in for hang nails.
 
RAMOSS said:
It will also need to regulate the drug industry, to get rid of the chronic price gouging on medicines.
Click to expand...

While there are several that are out and out gouging, research and drug development does cost a lot of money. If we want new drugs then someone somewhere has to pay for it.
 
snakestretcher said:
It does. My healthcare costs me nothing at the point of delivery. Free prescriptions, free eye glasses, free dental, free doctor visits, free surgery, free scans, free physiotherapy. Yes, I and everyone else, contributed to the NHS via general taxation, but the contributions were minimal and included provision for unemployment benefit, maternity leave, old age pension etc. What a terrible system nationalised healthcare is. I wish we had yours.
Click to expand...

OK, I will admit that my statement was over broad. Let's discuss the actions of the US federal government currently being the single-payer as related to it's DoD spending (highest in the world, by far). Simply because the UK's government have controlled their UHC system's costs does not, in any way, give me confidence that our congress critters or federal bureaucracy would (or even could) do so - based on how they spend like drunken sailors now and refuse to raise taxation sufficient to cover that spending.
 
RAMOSS said:
Yes, it does.. if it's done right. If you single payer instead of a for profit insurance company, you don't pay the costs for the insurance company in form of profits. Then, if you regulate the price gouging for medicines, that is a big amount of the costs too.
Click to expand...

LOL. You're saying that you expect the government to do something right?
 
Moderate Right said:
In other words, your best debate tactic is to deflect the conversation to something else. The left want Medicare For All, claiming that it would be so great. Apparently not.
Click to expand...

My debate tactic is to point out reality to those who find it inconvenient.
 
ttwtt78640 said:
OK, I will admit that my statement was over broad. Let's discuss the actions of the US federal government as being the single-payer as related to it's current DoD spending. Simply because the UK's government have controlled their UHC system's costs does not, in any way, give me confidence that our congress critters or federal bureaucracy would (or even could) do so - based on how they spend like drunken sailors now and refuse to raise taxation sufficient to cover that spending.
Click to expand...

You make a good point; also it's worth remembering that we've had 70 years to hone our system, albeit that it's in crisis right with gross under-funding from successive Conservative governments. Most important in my opinion is that it is fair and available to all, irrespective of income and status. We can opt out and choose the hugely more costly private option if preferred.
 
Helix said:
My debate tactic is to point out reality to those who find it inconvenient.
Click to expand...

This is a thread about MFA not being as good as advertised, to the point where this elderly couple took action. Of course they aren't the only elderly couple who don't think MFA is the Utopia the left tries to sell.
 
Moderate Right said:
While there are several that are out and out gouging, research and drug development does cost a lot of money. If we want new drugs then someone somewhere has to pay for it.
Click to expand...

That can be factored into the price, but thyat does not stop the current price gouging.
 
The whole country knows that Medicare pays 80%.. This couple must not have been able to afford the other 20%...

I guess the OP's point is without Medicare they would have been on the hook for the whole 100%, and somehow that's better?
 
Moderate Right said:
While I'm OK with increasing FICA taxes, I think there should be premiums and out of pocket costs. Preventable care is one thing, constant hypochondriacs mucking up the system is another. I don't want to wait one year for an appointment because everyone is going in for hang nails.
Click to expand...

You are missing my point. It now takes a 2.9% payroll tax on every $1 of every worker's gross income just to supplement the cost of the current Medicare (for some). I am betting that to increase those Medicare (for some) benefits to the level promised by M4A (which eliminates premiums, deductibles and co-pays) would at least double the required payroll taxation rate. If it costs 6% of every worker's gross income just to fund M4A level benefits for 15% of the US popualtion then it would require a payroll tax of at least 18% to pay for M4A level benefits for 100% of the US population.

Add to that 18% the 12.4% for Social Security and you have every US worker paying over 30% of their gross income in payroll taxes alone. And yes, I realize that half of that (FICA) payroll tax is technically paid by the employer but that simply means that your wage/salary is reduced to keep your total direct labor costs to your employer at a manageable (profitable?) level.
 
Moderate Right said:
This is a thread about MFA not being as good as advertised, to the point where this elderly couple took action. Of course they aren't the only elderly couple who don't think MFA is the Utopia the left tries to sell.
Click to expand...

And I countered your example with big picture reality. Hope that this clears it up for you.
 
RAMOSS said:
That can be factored into the price, but thyat does not stop the current price gouging.
Click to expand...

The left makes the mistake in thinking that every drug price is price gouging. First you say that R&D should be factored into the price and then when it is, you call it gouging. I don't deny there are incidents here and there that are indeed gouging.
 
ttwtt78640 said:
You are missing my point. It now takes a 2.9% payroll tax on every $1 of every worker's gross income just to supplement the cost of the current Medicare (for some). I am betting that to increase those Medicare (for some) benefits to the level promised by M4A (which eliminates premiums, deductibles and co-pays) would at least double the required payroll taxation rate. If it costs 6% of every worker's gross income just to fund M4A level benefits for 15% of the US popualtion then it would require a payroll tax of at least 18% to pay for M4A level benefits for 100% of the US population.

Add to that 18% the 12.4% for Social Security and you have every US worker paying over 30% of their gross income in payroll taxes alone. And yes, I realize that half of that (FICA) payroll tax is technically paid by the employer but that simply means that your wage/salary is reduced to keep your total direct labor costs to your employer at a manageable (profitable?) level.
Click to expand...

I'm totally against no premiums and no out of pocket costs. It will cause everyone to go to the doctor for every little scratch and muck up the system with hypochondriacs seeking care. We can't make it too easy to get care. Maybe we could charge higher costs for the stupid stuff.
 
Moderate Right said:
If it was what it was cracked up to be then this murder/suicide shouldn't have happened.
Click to expand...

Rubbish. The custom of members here to universalize from solitary happenings is a marvel of intellectual dimness.
 
Moderate Right said:
The left makes the mistake in thinking that every drug price is price gouging. First you say that R&D should be factored into the price and then when it is, you call it gouging. I don't deny there are incidents here and there that are indeed gouging.
Click to expand...

Did I say 'every drug price'?? ENough drug prices are price gouging. For example, look at the cost of insulin, or the epi pen. It happens often enough , and the prices for the same drug is 2 to 3 times higher in the US than it is in other countries.
 
Moderate Right said:
I'm totally against no premiums and no out of pocket costs. It will cause everyone to go to the doctor for every little scratch and muck up the system with hypochondriacs seeking care. We can't make it too easy to get care. Maybe we could charge higher costs for the stupid stuff.
Click to expand...

Nothing makes it easier than having EMTALA, Medicaid and/or Medicare which we already have. You simply are not going to get all of that toothpaste back into the tube. The medical care providers charge more for those paying full retail (cash or insurance customers) to offset the losses from treating EMTALA, Medicare and Medicaid patients. Giving some poor slob insurance which pays 80% of a $100K medical bill still leaves $20K to be shifted onto the (inflated) bills of other folks who will pay them.
 
Helix said:
And I countered your example with big picture reality. Hope that this clears it up for you.
Click to expand...

The left claim that MFA is the answer and yet this couple was buried so deep in medical bills they had to resort to this. You won't accept anything that destroys your fake Utopia.
 
JackA said:
Rubbish. The custom of members here to universalize from solitary happenings is a marvel of intellectual dimness.
Click to expand...

Rubbish? The article speaks for itself. This is what the left want, a government plan that causes people's medical bills to be so high they have to resort to this. It's not fake news.
 
RAMOSS said:
Did I say 'every drug price'?? ENough drug prices are price gouging. For example, look at the cost of insulin, or the epi pen. It happens often enough , and the prices for the same drug is 2 to 3 times higher in the US than it is in other countries.
Click to expand...

That's because it is the US footing most of the bill for R&D.
 
ttwtt78640 said:
Nothing makes it easier than having EMTALA, Medicaid and/or Medicare which we already have. You simply are not going to get all of that toothpaste back into the tube. The medical care providers charge more for those paying full retail (cash or insurance customers) to offset the losses from treating EMTALA, Medicare and Medicaid patients. Giving some poor slob insurance which pays 80% of a $100K medical bill still leaves $20K to be shifted onto the (inflated) bills of other folks who will pay them.
Click to expand...

I think I lost you. Are you saying that we should get rid of private insurance and force providers to accept a government plan where they lose money with every patient?
 
Moderate Right said:
The left claim that MFA is the answer and yet this couple was buried so deep in medical bills they had to resort to this. You won't accept anything that destroys your fake Utopia.
Click to expand...

A single payer system that covers everyone will address a lot of problems that a partial system doesn't. Basically, it will work here like it works everywhere else. We just have to vote out a lot of naysayers before it can happen. I'll do my part to help with that.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom