Is it now between Bernie and Bloomberg?

[Silver Bullitt]

Isn't that assuming you can one pay for medical expenses out of pocket until your deductible is reached while funding your HSA in the mean time till retirement? And even then any time you go to the doctor or hospital you do not know the bill you are going to get and I don't know about you but that scares me. This is not to say Bernie wants to get rid of HSA's for retirees I certainly don't know everything about HSA's in context to his plan but I do know that there are two tier systems in other countries.

The current system is designed to provide profit for investors not to solve health problems for clients. While you may 'like' your health plan but everyone who is paying a for-profit entity for healthcare is paying too much.

Right now we have the worst of both worlds. How insurance and healthcare companies make the most money isn't by providing the best healthcare. It's one of the few businesses that just doesn't make sense to be publicly run. Just like we've decided that it doesn't make sense for police to be a private company.

We talk about healthcare and infrastructure fixes year in and year out. Somehow money doesn't just spontaneously generate unless we're talking about military budget and somehow we find the 50bil to fund defense contracts or better yet somehow figure out a way to lower taxes on the rich and decrease gov't revenue by one trillion. So frustrating watching the rich loot the treasury year in and year out because we've been hoodwinked into believing theres always a bigger bad out there.

We have regulatory departments being run by members from the industry they are supposed to regulate, we're literally a kleptocracy.

For someone who seems to claim they know nearly everything, it doesn't appear much if any of that has been learned from life experiences.

The highest my HDHP plan limit ever was for my daughter was $3,900. If you are sick, or worse your child is sick, that should be more than a manageable expense. And, you are paying this out of pocket with your HSA deferral (pretax if you didn't know the benefits of an HSA). So, no you aren't doubling up here. Yes, you have to fund the HSA before you can withdraw from it, but like in my case, the total outlay was $3,900 any which way you want to look at it.

I have dealt with medical issues for some 25 years. These were complicated health issues. If you really believe our healthcare system is as bad as you want to make it sound, you are truly clueless. I have witnessed some bad doctors sure, usually their egos writing checks that their knowledge and skills can't cash. But I have also witnessed some of the greatest medical minds on this earth. Sometimes it seems the things they can do is nothing short of miracles.

You really might want to stick to another area for debate because you really don't have much of a clue in this area.

Sponsored

 

[watisthis]

Moreover on the notion of fraud and the 'small percentage of need' concerns. From my understanding fraud is almost always orchestrated by lawyers. Fraud only make up a very small portion of the entire 1 trillion yearly budget for social security, also, consider when fraudsters are caught they are made to pay back the money. With M4A the system would be more robust there would be less incentive to commit fraud because you are covered.

The need is immense not just a 'small percentage,' any major medical event can put you into bankruptcy even with good insurance. We all know insurance companies are looking to make money not looking to make you healthy. With national healthcare, the fed becomes the largest purchaser of medication and supplies which allows them to negotiate the price of life saving drugs which cost next to nothing to produce.

The problem is deeper than a small percentage of people ho need insurance. I can reiterate this all day, insurance companies exist to make profit. Just ask yourself how they make a profit. Either charging exorbitant rates for simple things like Advil or by denying coverage. 30 million people are uninsured and 40 million people are underinsured. Half a million go bankrupt each year due to medical costs. None of that should be happening in the richest country in the history of the world.

Right now, medicare has no ability to negotiate drug prices with Pharma companies even when most of these companies use federal tax dollars to fund R&D of drugs. Americans on average pay 1200 a year for prescription drugs. Whats even worse is that phamar compass can raise drug prices without repercussions literally leaving people to ration their medicine and die. Like I said before one vial of insulin on average costs $320 in the US (did a discussion on this earlier) while in Canada that same insulin costs $30. M4A would limit out of pocket drugs costs to $200 per year passing even more saving onto Americans.

I could touch more on the economics of this but obviously without implementation we won't know for sure same as with anything we do. A study done by the university of Massachusetts Amherst found that compared to the current system over 10 years M4A will save Americans almost 3 trillion.

 

[watisthis]

For someone who seems to claim they know nearly everything, it doesn't appear much if any of that has been learned from life experiences.

The highest my HDHP plan limit ever was for my daughter was $3,900. If you are sick, or worse your child is sick, that should be more than a manageable expense. And, you are paying this out of pocket with your HSA deferral (pretax if you didn't know the benefits of an HSA). So, no you aren't doubling up here. Yes, you have to fund the HSA before you can withdraw from it, but like in my case, the total outlay was $3,900 any which way you want to look at it.

I have dealt with medical issues for some 25 years. These were complicated health issues. If you really believe our healthcare system is as bad as you want to make it sound, you are truly clueless. I have witnessed some bad doctors sure, usually their egos writing checks that their knowledge and skills can't cash. But I have also witnessed some of the greatest medical minds on this earth. Sometimes it seems the things they can do is nothing short of miracles.

You really might want to stick to another area for debate because you really don't have much of a clue in this area.

I do not claim to know everything, I am only giving my opinion and we are free to debate the rights and wrongs of said opinions, this is what discourse is.

I'm glad things have worked out for you, but to assume that this is the luck of everyone is extremely naive as the numbers tell a different story.

 

[Silver Bullitt]

With M4A the system would be more robust there would be less incentive to commit fraud because you are covered.

The need is immense not just a 'small percentage,' any major medical event can put you into bankruptcy even with good insurance. We all know insurance companies are looking to make money not looking to make you healthy.

I can reiterate this all day, insurance companies exist to make profit. Just ask yourself how they make a profit. Either charging exorbitant rates for simple things like Advil or by denying coverage.

30 million people are uninsured and 40 million people are underinsured. Half a million go bankrupt each year due to medical costs.

Do you really believe you will have better coverage under M4A? Why do most seniors buy supplemental tie-in plans then? Why do many doctors deny coverage to Medicare patients today? My neighbor is an ER doctor in his mid 50's. He has flat out told me he will retire if we end up with nationalized healthcare. Why do you think that is? Do away with insurance, and all you'll have is Medicare. There will be no backup. Are you really ready to take that risk?

Insurance exists to spread or limit risk. That's it. That's it's entire purpose. And, any rational person would expect them to want to make a profit for doing that. You keep saying that any major medical event will result in bankruptcy when I have provided you with a real life scenario that proves otherwise.

Yes, we need protections for preexisting conditions. But federal law actually gives you this protection as long as you are responsible and maintain continuous coverage. It's been this way for a long time.

I'm not at all sure where you are going with your Advil example. I have purchased a lot of medications in my life, but I've never purchased them from an insurance company. Once again, insurance companies exist for one reason and one reason only, to spread or limit risk. And, there is a cost associated with this.

And finally, there are roughly 330 million people in the United States. Even if your 30 million number is correct, that means that over 90% of the population is covered. Yes, let's screw it up for them rather than try to come up with a plan to cover the 10% that aren't.

 

[lacanteen]

With national healthcare, the fed becomes the largest purchaser of medication and supplies which allows them to negotiate the price of life saving drugs which cost next to nothing to produce.

It is obvious that you have never done business with the federal government. The paperwork, red tape, and payment delays have the Fed paying much more for everything than the free market. I have experience here. The only reason MC payments are so low is because the Fed says "this is what we're paying". That's the same reason private physicians limit the number of MC patients they carry.

I did contract repairs for the navy. They paid $175.00 for the same work that I would bill a private business $60.00. A state entity would be charged $90.00 for the same work. The difference is the hassle and payment delays.

I do not want the government negotiating for me. They are self serving. Name something the Fed does efficiently and more cost effectively than the private sector.

 

[watisthis]

It is obvious that you have never done business with the federal government. The paperwork, red tape, and payment delays have the Fed paying much more for everything than the free market. I have experience here. The only reason MC payments are so low is because the Fed says "this is what we're paying". That's the same reason private physicians limit the number of MC patients they carry.

I did contract repairs for the navy. They paid $175.00 for the same work that I would bill a private business $60.00. A state entity would be charged $90.00 for the same work. The difference is the hassle and payment delays.

I do not want the government negotiating for me. They are self serving. Name something the Fed does efficiently and more cost effectively than the private sector.

I am a federal contractor who works with cyber policies, cyber tactics and change control boards so I understand the economics of it.

For many industries it makes sense to be public and have competition, and for many industries it does not. Look up monopolies.

No one would advocate for nationalizing the technology sector. However, health insurance, publicly traded profit incentivized private health insurance companies are extremely inefficient. This is because those health insurance companies have high admin costs for marketing, dividend payouts, departments that figure out creative ways to deny healthcare coverage in order to maximize profits, and because of these costs less money goes to pay out for health insurance. Which defies the purpose of health insurance companies in the first place.

So either a non profit or a government health insurer is far more efficient. A general rule of thumb is if the profitability directly counter the original model of the company it should either be nonprofit or public.

 

[watisthis]

Do you really believe you will have better coverage under M4A? Why do most seniors buy supplemental tie-in plans then? Why do many doctors deny coverage to Medicare patients today? My neighbor is an ER doctor in his mid 50's. He has flat out told me he will retire if we end up with nationalized healthcare. Why do you think that is? Do away with insurance, and all you'll have is Medicare. There will be no backup. Are you really ready to take that risk?

Insurance exists to spread or limit risk. That's it. That's it's entire purpose. And, any rational person would expect them to want to make a profit for doing that. You keep saying that any major medical event will result in bankruptcy when I have provided you with a real life scenario that proves otherwise.

Yes, we need protections for preexisting conditions. But federal law actually gives you this protection as long as you are responsible and maintain continuous coverage. It's been this way for a long time.

I'm not at all sure where you are going with your Advil example. I have purchased a lot of medications in my life, but I've never purchased them from an insurance company. Once again, insurance companies exist for one reason and one reason only, to spread or limit risk. And, there is a cost associated with this.

And finally, there are roughly 330 million people in the United States. Even if your 30 million number is correct, that means that over 90% of the population is covered. Yes, let's screw it up for them rather than try to come up with a plan to cover the 10% that aren't.

I'll edit and respond to this in a bit gotta get some stuff done real quick but don't want you to think I'm not going to attempt to answer your questions.

 

[lacanteen]

The government runs Amtrak-losing money
The government oversees US postal Service-losing money
Fannie Mae/Freddie Mac-clusterfuck
The VA system-clusterfuck
The IRS-clusterfuck
Department of Defense (the largest employer in the world)-$600 hammers, layers upon layers of bureaucracy.
Social Security fraud-(Google 'estimated social security fraud') $3-$5 billion per year
Medicare fraud (Google 'estimated medicare fraud') $52 billion per year
Welfare fraud-(you know the drill) $77 billion (2017 that was 10.3%)
Government waste in general:
https://www.heritage.org/budget-and-spending/report/50-examples-government-waste
https://freebeacon.com/tag/government-waste/
https://www.rd.com/culture/wasteful-government-spending-examples/

The government is supposed to keep us safe from threats, foreign and domestic, maintain social order, and provide assistance with infrastructure. The government may not make a profit but many many entities do profit from government activities. How many millionaires were made with "Obamacare"?

 

[Silver Bullitt]

I'll edit and respond to this in a bit gotta get some stuff done real quick but don't want you to think I'm not going to attempt to answer your questions.

I can't wait.

 

[Silver Bullitt]

The government runs Amtrak-losing money
The government oversees US postal Service-losing money
Fannie Mae/Freddie Mac-clusterfuck
The VA system-clusterfuck
The IRS-clusterfuck
Department of Defense (the largest employer in the world)-$600 hammers, layers upon layers of bureaucracy.
Social Security fraud-(Google 'estimated social security fraud') $3-$5 billion per year
Medicare fraud (Google 'estimated medicare fraud') $52 billion per year
Welfare fraud-(you know the drill) $77 billion (2017 that was 10.3%)
Government waste in general:
https://www.heritage.org/budget-and-spending/report/50-examples-government-waste
https://freebeacon.com/tag/government-waste/
https://www.rd.com/culture/wasteful-government-spending-examples/

The government is supposed to keep us safe from threats, foreign and domestic, maintain social order, and provide assistance with infrastructure. The government may not make a profit but many many entities do profit from government activities. How many millionaires were made with "Obamacare"?

Why do we waste our time with some of these people? I guess it's the hope that we might actually get them to see the light.

 

[lacanteen]

Why do we waste our time with some of these people? I guess it's the hope that we might actually get them to see the light.

Keeping things civil has a chance of positive conclusions. Name calling and snot throws serve no useful purpose.

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Does Mayor Pete have a chance? I could perhaps see the DNC rallying with him if Biden fades away. The super-delegates need someone to get behind. I guess the DNC is holding them back for now, unlike 2016.

 

[watisthis]

I can't wait.

Yes, we'll have better coverage. It's still insurance, it's just in the biggest possible pool of money to pay claims. Right now we pay shareholder benefits, advertisers, CEOs, lobbyists, etc. Those costs disappear, the cost variation which exists now which is completely divorced from actual costs to providers will be rest to accurate levels and prices will be more reasonable. You seem to have done no research at all on the 45k deaths that happen every year due to lack of access to healthcare or the 530k bankruptcies per year, both are unacceptable.

I'm curious, whose risk you think insurance companies are spreading? Who will go broke when they get sick if we have medicare for all? You understand that your example neighbor is saying he has made enough money already he can just stop working and not have to worry about anything. Not quite your average American.

A friend who lives in Belgium who has a family of 3 pays nearly $200 a year and his daughters brith complications were nearly free.

I can't speak on doctors denying coverage to medicare patients as I do not know. Perhaps you could enlighten me?

 

[watisthis]

The government runs Amtrak-losing money
The government oversees US postal Service-losing money
Fannie Mae/Freddie Mac-clusterfuck
The VA system-clusterfuck
The IRS-clusterfuck
Department of Defense (the largest employer in the world)-$600 hammers, layers upon layers of bureaucracy.
Social Security fraud-(Google 'estimated social security fraud') $3-$5 billion per year
Medicare fraud (Google 'estimated medicare fraud') $52 billion per year
Welfare fraud-(you know the drill) $77 billion (2017 that was 10.3%)
Government waste in general:
https://www.heritage.org/budget-and-spending/report/50-examples-government-waste
https://freebeacon.com/tag/government-waste/
https://www.rd.com/culture/wasteful-government-spending-examples/

The government is supposed to keep us safe from threats, foreign and domestic, maintain social order, and provide assistance with infrastructure. The government may not make a profit but many many entities do profit from government activities. How many millionaires were made with "Obamacare"?

Firstly, the USPS are not subsidized by the government. They are an independent agency that is not part of the government budget. All of their services are paid for by postage fees, they are entirely self funded. You can blame voters for its inefficiency as they demand it be so.

Secondly, this, it sounds like things aren't as black and white as what has been reported.

This is a lot of unpack here so give me a bit, lol.

 

[lacanteen]

Firstly, the USPS are not subsidized by the government. They are an independent agency that is not part of the government budget. All of their services are paid for by postage fees, they are entirely self funded. You can blame voters for its inefficiency as they demand it be so.

Secondly, this, it sounds like things aren't as black and white as what has been reported.

This is a lot of unpack here so give me a bit, lol.

Didn't say it was subsidized, it was created by the US government and is overseen by the US government. Here's the intro from Wikipedia:

The United States Postal Service (USPS; also known as the Post Office, U.S. Mail, or Postal Service) is an independent agency of the executive branch of the United States federal government responsible for providing postal service in the United States, including its insular areas and associated states. It is one of the few government agencies explicitly authorized by the United States Constitution.

The USPS traces its roots to 1775 during the Second Continental Congress, when Benjamin Franklin was appointed the first postmaster general. The Post Office Department was created in 1792 with the passage of the Postal Service Act. It was elevated to a cabinet-level department in 1872, and was transformed by the Postal Reorganization Act of 1970 into the United States Postal Service as an independent agency.[4]

The USPS as of 2017 has 644,124 active employees in 2014. The USPS is legally obligated to serve all Americans, regardless of geography, at uniform price and quality. The USPS has exclusive access to letter boxes marked "U.S. Mail" and personal letterboxes in the United States, but now has to compete against private package delivery services, such as United Parcel Service, FedEx, and Amazon.[5]

Since the early 1980s, many of the direct tax subsidies to the Post Office, with the exception of subsidies for costs associated with the disabled and overseas voters, have been reduced or eliminated, in addition to the advantages associated with a government-enforced monopoly on the delivery of first-class mail.[6] Since the 2006 all-time peak mail volume,[7] after which Congress passed the Postal Accountability and Enhancement Act[8] which mandated that $5.5 billion per year be paid to fully prefund employee retirement health benefits,[9] revenue dropped sharply due to recession-influenced[10] declining mail volume,[11] prompting the postal service to look to other sources of revenue while cutting costs to reduce its budget deficit

The government founded it, influenced it, oversees it, and it's as effed up as the Feds. Doing business with the USPS is as convoluted as the Fed. USPS may not be US family but they are step siblings by default in the way it was created and handed off.

 

[lacanteen]

A friend who lives in Belgium who has a family of 3 pays nearly $200 a year and his daughters brith complications were nearly free.

Apples and Oranges. Belgium is roughly the size of our state of Maryland with 12 million people, compared to our 330 million citizens and 12-30 million, depending on who you ask, non legal beings.

Sponsored