This Is Medicare For All

[jaeger19]

Based on what evidence?



No, it means pretty much everything. Why do you think health insurance premiums are so high?

1. Compare the medical technology available today.. the treatments today, and age of mortality of today.. compared to the 1920.s

And then decide whether you would rather have your cancer being treated by 1920 standards.. or 2019 standards.

2. No pricing means nothing. Insurance premiums are high because of people are willing to pay that rate, and there is little competition to drive prices down.

If you disagree.. I suggest you look at an EOB.. or explanation of benefits when you get a bill. You will see what the hospital charged.. and what the insurance paid. Rarely if ever is what the insurance paid.. equal to what the price was.

then compare that with a bunch of insurances and you will see that what the insurance paid was dramatically different between each insurance. So yes.. the price charge by the hospital was largely irrelevant.

 

[jaeger19]

.

$4,000 a day here for a hospital room. That's not nothing..

It means nothing. Charge 10,000.. charge 4000... it means nothing because what the hospital actually gets.. is determined by the insurance companies.

In fact.. in a lot of cases.. the charge means absolutely nothing.. because the hospital is not reimbursed based on its hospital room charge etc.. its based on a DRG or diagnostic related groups payment schedule.

 

[jaeger19]

Medicare today is paid for by taxes. 1.45% of income on average adjusted yearly. Average health insurance cost is 6% and rising. Employers pay roughly 82% of premiums on group plans but that is tax deductible so the taxpayer covers part of that bill. If you want to complain about the projected cost of MFA at least recongnize the trade offs.

Yes.. medicare is paid for by taxes.. by people who pay in their whole working lives.. and then at the end of their working life.. when they retire.. they only then get medicare.

That's how the system has worked.. and even then.. medicare is in a bit of trouble as its not taking in.. what its putting out now.

So.. now that you want to add Millions of people onto medicare.. that have not paid in for their whole working life...but yet now can access medicare? Taxes are going to have to go up exponentially.

I do recognize the tradeoffs.

And no tax payers are not "footing the bill".. for premiums on group plans.. the employer is. The tax payer is not putting in a dime.

Meanwhile on medicare.. the employer is paying half of the medicare percentage for their employees. .

 

[aociswundumho]

1. Compare the medical technology available today.. the treatments today, and age of mortality of today.. compared to the 1920.s

There have been huge technological advances in every industry under the sun. In markets where there isn't massive government intervention (like healthcare) prices are always going down.

Insurance premiums are high because of people are willing to pay that rate,

The ACA forces health insurance companies to pay 80 to 85 percent of the money they collect in premiums to healthcare costs. Only 20 - 15 percent goes to overhead, administration, profits, and other expenses. They are transferring 80 to 85 percent of the money they collect in premiums directly to hospitals. The premiums are sky high because healthcare provider costs are sky high. FFS, we spend 10k per person per year, which is about twice what other countries spend.

ObamaCare Rate Review & the 80/20 Rule

 

[UtahBill]

It does. My healthcare costs me nothing at the point of delivery. Free prescriptions, free eye exam, 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.

BUT, you have to live in GB !!!!!

 

[UtahBill]

Concerning USA only, how does anyone get old enough to be called elderly and not know how the system works? Neighbor lady told me that as soon as her husband turns 65, they will sign up for Medicare for both of them. She is 6 years younger than him, so no Medicare for her until she turns 65. Here she was assuming she was about to retire based on HIS age. He was unaware as she was, so they didn't get to retire as soon as they anticipated. She needed insurance coverage for those 6 years and thought HIS employer would cover it....

Likewise, a friend is very frustrated because his kids don't understand the "paying for college" situation. They are finding out that a big name college can give out scholarships of $25 K per year, which sounds good, but that doesn't even cover tuition, so they still have to pay for living expenses. Friend can't help all his kids unless they choose local/state colleges and live at home....
Seems like the High School counselors are doing a bad job of preparing these kids for real life.

 

[ALiberalModerate]

It means nothing. Charge 10,000.. charge 4000... it means nothing because what the hospital actually gets.. is determined by the insurance companies.

In fact.. in a lot of cases.. the charge means absolutely nothing.. because the hospital is not reimbursed based on its hospital room charge etc.. its based on a DRG or diagnostic related groups payment schedule.

Around half of all markets are provider monopolies where one health system owns the entire market. In those markets, the insurers have little ability at all to negotiate lower reimbursements.

Of course, the same is true of insurers in many markets as well. Where they can be one insurer serving an entire local market, and of course there is a lot of rent seeking behavior on both sides of it as the current system is largely a market failure.

 

[LetsGoBrandon]

Just gotta take the whitehouse... which will be done, and the senate. And that's looking pretty good. You can go ahead and start crying now.

Sounds like the same false confidence you had in the 2016 election season. You may still be crying over that one.

 

[LetsGoBrandon]

No one can get around the fact that Medicare by itself, with no supplements, sucks. And this is what the left want - MFA. But it ain't worth a **** without having to pay additional premiums for several different supplements, on top of the increased taxes you pay for MFA. That's not kool-aid.

Not to mention that on a medicare for all system, the medicare part b premiums would go up faster then Bill Clinton smoking a marinated cigar.

 

[LetsGoBrandon]

I think you need to read up on what a market failure is. I am a firm believer in markets, but necessary healthcare is by definition a market failure. If you are having a heart attack, and require surgery to survive, your choice is to pay what the provider demands of you, or die. That is the definition of a market failure. You can't shop that, you can't forgo it if it is too expensive. You have no choice but to pay, or you die.

Why do you think that no country on earth want's our healthcare system? There are lots of other market economies, but none of them want our healthcare system.

Also, you need to read up on what rent seeking behavior is, which is rampant in our healthcare system.

No one is arguing that a specialist should not be paid very well, but if a specialist would be making 400k a year in France, Germany, Japan and so on, why are they making 800k or 900k a year here other than what amounts to extortion? Why do we have hospital administrators here making exorbitant salaries compared to what they get anywhere else in the world? Why are half of our healthcare markets monopolies? It's not the government. Its because its a market failure.

You clearly do not have the foggiest clue how market forces work. And referring to healthcare as a market failure is laughable. First we would have to put market forces back into healthcare. They are certainly not under that asinine ponzi scheme known as Obamacare.

 

[LetsGoBrandon]

You have no idea what Medicare for all would result in. There's a reason why France with universal, nationalised, healthcare ranks #1 in the world for quality of healthcare, and there are many reasons why America, the wealthiest and most advanced nation, languishes in an embarrassing 36th, just above Costa Rica but lagging behind tiny Slovenia. Can you guess what that reason is? It's because your system is rubbish; you're fleeced by venal insurance companies who have no interest in your condition other than how much they can shaft you for the minimum of cover.

You can also explain to me why my NHS treatment costs me more, because the last time I had hospital treatment it cost me nothing. The very small contribution I make to National Insurance as a component of general taxation is still far, far cheaper than what you pay. And why is that? Because everyone pays, thus the cost is spread across the population and works out cheaper for everyone (Communism, obviously).
NI contributions also include provision for unemployment benefit, dentistry, optical, paid maternity leave, doctors appointments and, at my age, free prescriptions. What a terrible system, I'm sure you'll agree.

Sorry, but you lost me with your 36th ranking nonsense. I don't take any study or survey that ranks the USA 36th in the quality seriously and neither should you. And I absolutely do know what Medicare for all would result it. It would wipe out traditional healthcare and healthcare insurance, it would result in a massive doctor and specialist shortage, many less hospitals and far less high tech diagnostic equipment. To put it bluntly, it would result in rationed healthcare.

 

[LetsGoBrandon]

Prior to 1973 healthcare in the US was cheap and affordable. That was the year of the first big piece of government intervention into the healthcare market: the HMO Act. Ever since then it's been more government intervention and more government regulation until we have a situation where hospitals don't even give out prices but charge sick people $12 for a dixie cup.

Exactly. in my youth, I barely noticed payroll deductions for health insurance. Since then, every instance of government tinkering has led to more increased cost.

 

[LetsGoBrandon]

If universal healthcare was adopted and you shut for-profit insurers out, guess what? Every gets richer-and healthier-and healthcare, overall, is cheaper for everyone.

Shutting for profit insurers out will only drive up the cost of healthcare, even in a universal healthcare system.

 

[LetsGoBrandon]

Clearly you haven't read the actual bill.

MFA represents an expansion of existing Medicare services as well as an expansion of coverage.

Not really. What you have is a gaggle of left wing clown candidates attempting to out socialist each other before the primaries. After the democrap convention, the nominee will quickly run towards the center, knowing that the nonsense they are proposing would never pass congress and would never become law.

 

[LetsGoBrandon]

It wasn't a fantasy for every other nation with universal healthcare where private insurers don't get a sniff. Poor America, left behind again.

You do not know as much about other nation's so-called universal healthcare as you think you do.

 

[LetsGoBrandon]

So explain why universal healthcare is cheaper than private medical insurance in every country that has adopted it, and still has the private option. You have the highest per capita spend on healthcare, in the world, by a long way. Yet you rank 36th in quality of healthcare.

Because it's rationed to the point that less cost is meaningless.

 

[Surrealistik]

Not really. What you have is a gaggle of left wing clown candidates attempting to out socialist each other before the primaries. After the democrap convention, the nominee will quickly run towards the center, knowing that the nonsense they are proposing would never pass congress and would never become law.

You can theorise about what's going to happen in your crystal ball, but what the bill actually says is very clear.

 

[jaeger19]

There have been huge technological advances in every industry under the sun. In markets where there isn't massive government intervention (like healthcare) prices are always going down.




The ACA forces health insurance companies to pay 80 to 85 percent of the money they collect in premiums to healthcare costs. Only 20 - 15 percent goes to overhead, administration, profits, and other expenses. They are transferring 80 to 85 percent of the money they collect in premiums directly to hospitals. The premiums are sky high because healthcare provider costs are sky high. FFS, we spend 10k per person per year, which is about twice what other countries spend.

ObamaCare Rate Review & the 80/20 Rule

Yes.. there has been huge changes in technology.

Please tell me what the cost of a bicycle in 1920 was compared to a the cost of a full suspension mountainbike today.

Somehow. I don't; think people were paying 2200 for that bicycle in 1920.

So no..the market prices didn't; go down.

Its called inflation.

T

The ACA forces health insurance companies to pay 80 to 85 percent of the money they collect in premiums to healthcare costs. Only 20 - 15 percent goes to overhead, administration, profits, and other expenses. They are transferring 80 to 85 percent of the money they collect in premiums directly to hospitals. The premiums are sky high because healthcare provider costs are sky high.

And again.. people are willing to pay that rate.

The irony here is that without the federal government.. healthcare prices would be so much higher. Demand is through the roof.
But.. because the government has DECREASED reimbursement to providers and controlled reimbursement to providers.. actually reimbursement.. what we get paid has declined or been stable.

 

[jaeger19]

Around half of all markets are provider monopolies where one health system owns the entire market. In those markets, the insurers have little ability at all to negotiate lower reimbursements.

Of course, the same is true of insurers in many markets as well. Where they can be one insurer serving an entire local market, and of course there is a lot of rent seeking behavior on both sides of it as the current system is largely a market failure.

Well, I would dispute that "half of ALL markets are provider monopolies".. because.. while providers like myself.. ARE FORBIDDEN BY LAW.. to actually become a monopoly.. as we are subject to ANTI TRUST LAWS.

Whereas insurance companies...Healthcare insurance companies are exempted from anti trust laws.

 

[jaeger19]

You clearly do not have the foggiest clue how market forces work. And referring to healthcare as a market failure is laughable. First we would have to put market forces back into healthcare. They are certainly not under that asinine ponzi scheme known as Obamacare.

Actually Obamacare was a market based approach to putting market forces back into healthcare.

Republicans.. and I am a republican.. then killed the market based approaches in Obamacare.. and kept the non market based solutions like subsidies and expansion of Medicaid. .

Just facts.

 

[aociswundumho]

Somehow. I don't; think people were paying 2200 for that bicycle in 1920. So no..the market prices didn't; go down.

You have to compare like to like.

Its called inflation.

Good lord. Inflation is monetary, it has nothing to do with technology or time. This is my last response to you. You have no idea what your talking about, and it's not my job to educate you.

 

[Moderate Right]

Then you would know that there's little need for supplemental, as even things like drugs and dental are covered, and co-pays/deductibles aren't really existent as services are free at point of payment.

LOL. You've been drinking Bernie's kool-aid. Healthcare costs trillions of dollars but let's let the government pay for it all. People don't have to pay anything.

 

[Moderate Right]

Well, I guess it was also an unfeasible fantasy in every other country before it was adopted. And yet they appear to be managing quite well. Why is America
uniquely impotent to change for the better?

Because in America the roots are already grown solid and our economy is ten times the size of the other countries that did it.

 

[Moderate Right]

Yeah.. no.

Medicare is awesome.. in fact its better than any other insurance out there. Even without a supplement. Its so great that rich people LOVE their medicare.

Medicare if far and away better than what you have now Guaranteed.. even if your employer foots the total bill for your insurance. Its hard pressed to find any insurance in this country that's better than medicare.. when it comes to patient coverage.

Medicare is so great.. its the reason that the left wants to call what they plan to do... "medicare for all".

The problems is...… they can't actually do medicare for all.. without either increasing taxes exponentially... OR reducing medicare as it is today.

That's the rub of medicare for all.

Now jaeger, you know that isn't true. Every insurance I have ever had, from when I was dirt poor to including right now is far superior than Medicare, even if you buy Medicare supplements. So, it sure as hell is better than Med A.

 

[Surrealistik]

LOL. You've been drinking Bernie's kool-aid. Healthcare costs trillions of dollars but let's let the government pay for it all. People don't have to pay anything.

He cites the taxes that are necessary to pay for it; paying less in taxes than you would in premiums/deductibles/co-pays is still advantageous.

In general the country would end up paying significantly less for an MFA scheme than it currently does.

Even the obviously biased study from the right wing Mercatus think tank that was particularly conservative with the savings assumed concluded as much; trillions less over 10 years.