• 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!

There are 36 countries with better healthcare than the USA. What needs to happen?

What needs to change in US healthcare?

  • Complete overhaul, replacing old system with European-style universal healthcare.

    Votes: 25 65.8%

  • Partial overhaul, including expansion of Medicare, reworking of profit-based insurance system.

    Votes: 7 18.4%

  • Sparse overhaul, based around getting rid of the profit-based private insurance companies.

    Votes: 4 10.5%

  • Nothing needs to change, the US system is good the way it is.

    Votes: 2 5.3%
  • Total voters
    38
Carjosse said:
If they can't feed their families because they are poor they aren't paying taxes and if they are they can't feed their families because they are bad with money.
Click to expand...

they pay 53% taxes, so basically .53 of every dollar goes to the government, imagine a family of 4 giving over have their income to the government every pay day? Holy ****!
 
Fruityfact said:
"We liked ours too"...Maybe you did. The poor, not so much. Now, Obamacare may not be the perfect solution, but it isn't the menace your partisanship tries to portray.
Click to expand...

The poor aren't fans of anything they have to pay for, that's part of being poor. However, the near and working poor are devastated by Obamacare. Not being "poor enough" for subsidy, they now have to buy insurance, prices on which have inflated AND the option of finding a job that offers healthcare as a benefit is growing dimmer by the moment.

It's not partisanship, there are folks on the left saying the same thing. Why, because it's the reality of it. The only question here is why you would support such a thing.
 
Fruityfact said:
You're defacto reason has no merit. What bearing does numbers have on the system?
Click to expand...

First, it's "your", second, numbers count for everything in terms of availability and treatment.
 
Rocketman said:
they pay 53% taxes, so basically .53 of every dollar goes to the government, imagine a family of 4 giving over have their income to the government every pay day? Holy ****!
Click to expand...

Then they are rather wealthy and have a very crap accountant. They would have to make around 160,000$/year, live in Nova Scotia, and take no deductions. Even then hey are not paying 53%. According to a difftrent clauculator they would only have to make 120,000$/year in Quebec to achieve 50% without any deductions. Either way they would have to be wealthy.
 
Last edited:
Hard Truth said:
Read my posts, I am not defending ACA, I'm saying that the previous non-system was not acceptable. I prefer a system that does not include a role for insurance companies at all.
Click to expand...

I simply disagree. I think there are a lot of things that can be done that haven't been properly considered and that keep federal government out of health care completely or mostly.
 
Ad_Captandum said:
We don't make everyone pay 50% tax. That's simply factually inaccurate. We have a progressive tax scale, like you do.
Click to expand...

And that's fine if it works for you folks. Not how I want to live, but hey, if it doesn't piss you off and you see the merit in living that way, more power to you.
 
Carjosse said:
Then they are rather wealthy and have a very crap accountant. They would have to make around 160,000$/year, live in Nova Scotia, and take no deductions. Even then hey are not paying 53%. According to a difftrent clauculator they would only have to make 120,000$/year in Quebec to achieve 50% without any deductions. Either way they would have to be wealthy.
Click to expand...

bullcrap, one lives in Montreal, he makes 10k more that I do, and I still live better and have money left to invest. Of course now we have ACA which weakens coverage and cost more so I may be in the same boat as him now
 
Ad_Captandum said:
We don't make everyone pay 50% tax. That's simply factually inaccurate. We have a progressive tax scale, like you do.
Click to expand...

he makes 10k more than I do and I take home 20%+ more money that he does. Free healthcare is nothing but a liberal lie
 
Rocketman said:
bullcrap, one lives in Montreal, he makes 10k more that I do, and I still live better and have money left to invest. Of course now we have ACA which weakens coverage and cost more so I may be in the same boat as him now
Click to expand...

He makes a fair amount of money then unless he makes exactly 10k. Do you numbers I could use? Even then healthcare only accounts for a small potion of the tax money and Quebec has an additional healthcare fee as well of about 50$ for the average household.
 
Last edited:
Carjosse said:
He makes a fair amount of money then unless he makes exactly 10k. Do you numbers I could use?
Click to expand...

he makes around 150k, so he takes home less that 75k a year unless he is participating in 401k, life insurance, disability, etc, so probably way less.
 
Rocketman said:
he makes around 150k, so he takes home less that 75k a year unless he is participating in 401k, life insurance, disability, etc, so probably way less.
Click to expand...

So if he makes 150,000$/year he pays a marginal rate of 49.97% but the average rate is only 37.20% and his after tax income should be around 94,193$/year. If he struggling to feed his children he is rather bad with his money but for his taxes he gets some of the best education in the world (Quebec rivals Asia) for his children (if he has any), some of the best healthcare in Canada, and QPP which actually works unlike American social security among numerous other social benefits Quebec and Canada enjoys.
 
Last edited:
Carjosse said:
So if he makes 150,000$/year he pays a marginal rate of 49.97% but the average rate is only 37.20% and his after tax income should be around 94,193$/year. If he struggling to feed his children he is rather bad with his money but for his taxes he gets some of the best education in thew world for his children (if he has any), some of the best healthcare in Canada, and QPP which actually works unlike American social security among numerous other social benefits Quebec enjoys.
Click to expand...

I have seen his check it is over 50%, not sure what other taxes you have there but it is ridiciulous. Even using your math 49.97 does not equal 94k, I can tell this was a waste of time. The only social benefit in Montreal is gentlemen clubs if you are into that, other than that it is nothing more than 2-3 days before I am ready to come home.
 
Rocketman said:
I have seen his check it is over 50%, not sure what other taxes you have there but it is ridiciulous. Even using your math 49.97 does not equal 94k, I can tell this was a waste of time. The only social benefit in Montreal is gentlemen clubs if you are into that, other than that it is nothing more than 2-3 days before I am ready to come home.
Click to expand...

Then I suggest he gets a better accountant, the 94k is based off the average tax rate of 37.2%. Those taxes are combined Quebec and federal taxes so those taxes pay for a lot, as I said some of the best education in the world, some of the best healthcare in the wrold, the CBC, and many other world class services.
 
Carjosse said:
Then I suggest he gets a better accountant, the 94k is based off the average tax rate of 37.2%. Those taxes are combined Quebec and federal taxes so those taxes pay for a lot, as I said some of the best education in the world, some of the best healthcare in the wrold, the CBC, and many other world class services.
Click to expand...

best healthcare? is that why he lost his mother last year waiting on an operation for 3 months she could have had the first week here? or some other distant relative simple procedure? It is actually propaganda and a brainwashed population that thinks it is the best.
 
What kind of operation? Did she have comorbitities that delayed the surgery? How do you know she could have it in a week here?
Rocketman said:
best healthcare? is that why he lost his mother last year waiting on an operation for 3 months she could have had the first week here? or some other distant relative simple procedure? It is actually propaganda and a brainwashed population that thinks it is the best.
Click to expand...
 
mak2 said:
What kind of operation? Did she have comorbitities that delayed the surgery? How do you know she could have it in a week here?
Click to expand...

at the time, I asked my doctor and he said it would have been done next week here. People in Canada are stuck when something is bad and they need it fast which is how it will be here now that we have this awful legislation. Everyone loses with this law.
 
What was the surgery? Did she have pneumonia? Do you really think if Canadians are dying because they cant get needed surgery? Why arent they trying to get a system like ours? Oh the outrage...
Rocketman said:
at the time, I asked my doctor and he said it would have been done next week here. People in Canada are stuck when something is bad and they need it fast which is how it will be here now that we have this awful legislation. Everyone loses with this law.
Click to expand...
 
Universal healthcare is the goal, but through profit making insurance companies who provide good healthcare for an acceptable price, replacing in part medicare and medicaid by using that money to provide assistance to those who make too little money (like the elderly and poor) to pay the healthcare insurance and providing some relief for the middle class by making the healthcare payments a tax deduction for them. People making over 200,000 will not be allowed to use it as a tax deduction.

For the rest things should remain largely the same but with oversight to make sure that the costs of healthcare do not spiral out of control. Insurance companies should also make sure that doctors do not spend the insurance carriers money by using very expensive medication where a lot cheaper but equally effective alternatives are available. Only if it is medically necessary should more expensive brand medications be used over generic medications (in case of medical need or allergic issues to the generic medication).
 
scatt said:
So you just randomly dislike insurance that was consensually bought?
Click to expand...

If some people want commerical insurance, that is OK with me. But I want the choice to participate in a health system that is not profit oriented, esp in the area of insurance. (I am aware that many insurance companies are nominally non-profit, but that is not the reality of the situation.] Unless it is an HMO, the insurance company's interests are contrary to their customers interests.
 
Hard Truth said:
If some people want commerical insurance, that is OK with me. But I want the choice to participate in a health system that is not profit oriented, esp in the area of insurance. (I am aware that many insurance companies are nominally non-profit, but that is not the reality of the situation.] Unless it is an HMO, the insurance company's interests are contrary to their customers interests.
Click to expand...

Is it okay with you enough to not lock them in a cage for not wanting to fund it?
 
mak2 said:
It's the profit.
Click to expand...

Too many lawyers, too much litigation makes too expensive insurance. Being misdiagnosed or having a crooked scar is like winning the lottery. Half of society is having to play defense against lawyers and lawsuits and the cost is passed on to you-know-who.
That, and the bloated profits. Don't get me started about bloated profits...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom