Hello:

There are a couple of things I don't understand about the health care debate.

1) Everyone is talking about what happens if you don't have insurance. And everyone seems to think the government is going to offer their own version. I have heard this too.

Yet, nobody is talking about what type of plan the government will offer.

Simple questions such as:

What will the monthly premium be?
How much will the deductible be?
Will there be an out of pocket maximum, and if so, what will it be?
Will there be a prescription plan, and if so, how much will they cost?
What will the co-insurance rate be? (i.e. 20%)?
Can we see doctors we choose?
Will we need a referral to see a specialist?
What's not covered?

Furthermore, and this may not apply to everyone, but if anyone out there is opposed to any medical health plan provided by the government for the uninsured (what ever that health plan may be) and yet you are on social security and medicare (disabled and retired) then

SIT DOWN and BE QUIET.

There is a member of my family who hates Obama with a passion, and complains about his every move. And of course, this health care thing is on the top of his list.
Yet he is on disability and medicare, with humama.

Sorry, how can he debate this, when he himself brags about his wonderful health care plan, that is 100 times better and cheaper than my private plan at work.

I'm not saying that government run health care isn't socialist. I am saying that so is social security and medicare, yet nobody is complaining about that. The only thing they complain about is the fact that social security and medicare might not be around much longer due to lack of funds...

HUH??

Just come out and say it medicare people- you're fine with you're socialist health care plan, but you don't wan't younger, healthier uninured people to have it?

Before the 30's there was no social security. You worked, until you could work no more, and if you were lucky, you stashed a little money away somewhere to live off, most just moved in with one of the kids for them to take care of.

I have insurance now, but it wasn't long ago, I remember not having insurance, and it was that way for many years. Once I got very sick one October, while making $5.15 per hour. Dealth with that for 5 days, once my temprature got up to 104.5. But never went to the doctor. And fewer and fewer employers are offering health care to their employee's. At least I have been hard pressed to find one that does.

I'mm worried about this new government health care because I don't know enough about it, nobody is saying how much it will cost me. No one is giving any details, other than "it's socialist".

My official posistion:

If I can get a better plan through the government for my entire family at a cost of less than $800 per month, then sign me up, because that's what I'm paying Anthem for a $2000 deductable plan.

Both Medicare and Social Security are in essence bankrupt. When you come of age either they will have changed their eligibilty age ,and /or will consume much more of the income of your children funding this transfer of wealth from the young to the old. Both are ponzi schemes .

The rest of your question about the details cannot be addressed because no one knows in reality what is being proposed . Jon Conyers said :
"What good is reading the [health care] bill if it's a thousand pages and you don't have two days and two lawyers to find out what it means after you read the bill?" Conyers thinks it's an antiquated notion that congressmen actually read legislation,and has made it clear he intends to vote on the bill without reading it. He is one of the leading proponents of the reform... but doesn't know what it contains.

No one denies that there are issues with our current system. But so far ,the cure appears to me to be worse than the disease.

You bring up several good points.

1) We don't know how the government will pay for all of this. We know it won't be through premiums... it will be through increased taxes. But it amounts to the same thing. But nobody in the Obama government is willing to come out and say how much our taxes will go up because of it. They're afraid to, because they know that if they are honest about it, nobody would back the plan.

2) I agree with you about Medicare and Medicaid and Social Security. They are socialist programs. Actually, they are worse... they're Ponzi schemes, which if done by anyone else would make them illegal. Money being paid by me today is going to service people who are current beneficiaries. When I become a beneficiary, someone else's money will be paying for my benefits. A ponzi scheme is when money invested by one person is used to pay off another person's investment rather than being used to make money for the person who paid it in. Sounds pretty much the same to me.

I have been against Social Security forever. I backed Bush's idea of retirement savings plans. I'm also in favor of medical savings plans as an alternative to Medicare and Mediaid. I think that Americans do a better job of investing their money than the government does... and the government has proven that fact by taking all the money out of the Social Security Trust Fund and using it for other purposes.

So the point that I'm making is that I (and I believe the other Conservatives on this board who similarly support RSAs and MSAs) are pretty consistent in our beliefs that the government should stop taking our money "for our benefit" and let us handle our retirement and medical coverage issues ourselves.

Elliot

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ETWolverine

I backed Bush's idea of retirement savings plans.

---

You mean like we have here in socialist Canada?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ETWolverine

I think that Americans do a better job of investing their money than the government does...

---

No they don't. Given the alternative of willingly save money for the future or spend it now the average american will spend today's money and tomorrow's money as well as referenced by the crushing personal debt that most americans are willing to carry to get the consumer goods they thing they so deserve.

It is said that much of the plan being debated is modelled after the Massachusetts system.
Both Forbes and the Washington Compost wrote about the Mass. Plan.
MAss Disaster - Forbes.com

The Ticker - Mass. Treasurer Rips Mandated Health Insurance - Economy Watch

In fact ;according to the State's Treasurer the plan has been a disaster ,chock full of unintended consequences...

Quote:

---

– The program has so far cost 30 percent more than anticipated.
– It already has a $9 billion shortfall projected over the next two years.
– Costs have risen 41 percent since the program's inception, well outpacing the rise in healthcare costs nationwide, which stands at 18 percent.
– We thought this program would mean fewer people would go to hospitals, which is the highest cost any insurance plan has to pay. In fact, fewer people are not going to hospitals.
– A Harvard study shows 60 percent of state residents are unhappy with the plan. The most unhappy? Those whom it should be helping the most — those making $25,000 to $50,000 per year.
– To cut costs, the program is now having to kick out legal immigrants.

---

And unfulfilled promises .

Quote:

---

They were promised affordable coverage. The plans were so expensive that 20% of the uninsured were exempted from having to purchase them. … Bay Staters were told they wouldn't have their current arrangements disrupted. Yet thousands of residents have had to purchase more expensive coverage after the new bureaucracy deemed their existing plans inadequate. … three years in, the successor uncompensated care pool is still spending hundreds of millions of dollars. Emergency rooms are more crowded than ever. …

---

This plan was bi-partisan and current Governor Deval Patrick (and occasional author of the President's best remembered speechs) will have political problems because of the way the plan has performed .But Mitt Romney will also take a hit on his national asperations over the failure of the plan because he also touts it as a possible model for national reform(alleged improved access at lower costs ) .
If this is the model for national health care reform then no thank you .

Exxactly Andrew I am worried because we know nothing about it and once it is in government control they can keep switching things to their liking and we have no say or no choice. I don't want them to say I have to pay $200. For their plan because they force me to have insurance when if I wanted insurance I could go get something that is already available for cheaper.

One good thing so far is that the longer they take revising it I am hoping the revisions are for the better (ON our behalf)

I don't know why they don't go with the fair tax and the retirement plans and things like Costa Rica has because it sounds fairer than anything we got. I heard around a year or two ago that Costa Rica is now the spot Americans are flocking to because of their retirement plans, taxation method and so forth.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tomder55

It is said that much of the plan being debated is modelled after the Massachusetts system.

---

No, this is not being said.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by NeedKarma

You mean like we have here in socialist Canada?

No they don't. Given the alternative of willingly save money for the future or spend it now the average american will spend today's money and tomorrow's money as well as referenced by the crushing personal debt that most americans are willing to carry to get the consumer goods they thing they so deserve.

---

So you think everyone is as stupid as you are.

Sorry, not all people are short sighted. Not even most people are. Some people actually can see past today's lunch and plan for the future. That's why over 60% of Americans own retirement investment accounts in addition to Social Security... even though it isn't mandated. They are planning for their futures. Something which you don't think they are capable of.

Wrong again... as usual.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ETWolverine

So you think everyone is as stupid as you are.
.............

Wrong again... as usual.

---

Oh eliot, you are such a bundle of fun. You must have LOTS of friends!

Quote:

---

Quote:
Originally Posted by tomder55 https://www.askmehelpdesk.com/amhd_i...s/viewpost.gif
It is said that much of the plan being debated is modelled after the Massachusetts system.

No, this is not being said.

---

As ususal you are right again .

Obama Eyes Massachusetts Health Care - TIME

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tomder55

As ususal you are right again .

Obama Eyes Massachusetts Health Care - TIME

---

He's not modeling his plan after it, he's looking at the do's and don'ts by examining what is good and what is bad with MA's version.

You are aware that the author of the Senate version of the bill is fat Teddy Kennedy .
Health bill would fix what's broken - The Boston Globe

Included in the national bill is the mandatory coverage provision that the Mass . Plan has. That is one of many simularities . I'm right you're wrong . move on .

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tomder55

Included in the national bill is the mandatory coverage provision that the Mass . plan has.

---

That's a do.
What does Senator's kennedy's weigh have do with any of this? Oh yes, he's a democrat and you're full of hatred for them so you throw in a little insult.

I almost called him the swimmer also .

Wow, making light of the death of someone is not beneath you.

I agree with NK on this one.

We should all honor Mary-Jo Kopekni. I think that the date of her death should be declared a national holiday. Her sacrifice helped this country greatly by guaranteeing that Ted Kennedy would never be elected President.

She should've been honored years ago with the drumming of that disgusting person out of the Senate in a frog march .

Class acts.

I don't like the fact about what is not set forth with this upcoming health care plan. It is no plan as far as I can see except to deny medical care due to a lot of red tape in order to qualify. Also the granny killing or should I say withholding treatment for dimentia patients amongst other things. Also what really rankles me is they keep saying that 40 million Americans don't have health insurance. Since when are only 40 million effected by this? It's more like 140+ million Americans not having health insurance. You must count all the illegal aliens and the poor folks and the unemployed. Who the blazes can afford $800 for a family a month for insurance? That's downright obscene if you ask me. $9,600 a year AND a $2,000 deductible on top of that besides. Yeow! I am quite sure you could have put that money towards something better other than insurance.

When I'm 65 and they want to cram Medicare down my throat and take out $100 of my old people's monthly check I'm going to tell them a big fat NO THANK YOU. I'll keep my money as I'm sure I'll have more important things to buy such as electricity at a bazillion dollars a month if Obama has his way and taxes the electric companies out of existence.

That health plan needs to be stopped dead in it's tracks before it's way too late. The same with the Cap and Trade. They both need to be stopped now before America has no money and we are all reduced to being peasants (or should I say slaves) for the government.

The politicians talk, talk, talk and don't bother giving Americans the little details such as how it's going to be paid for, paid for by whom, what it will cost monthly (or yearly or whatever) and if any American can walk into any doctor's office and get medical care - and will they have to prove they are American citizens and not illegal aliens? Other countries don't stand for illegal aliens being treated for free by doctors or hospitals - why does America literally cater to these people and actually encourage them to use the Emergency Rooms as family doctor's offices? They never pay one cent for ER visits - ever! But just let an American who has a home, good job, etc make an ER visit and wham they will get slammed with a huge ER bill that they must pay or get sued in court.

Back in 1974 I went to the ER in Florida for smoke inhalation from a house fire. I spent 4 hours in the hospital and my only "treatment" was inhaling oxygen, no meds, virtually nothing else, and no ambulance ride either. No X-Rays, nothing. For that treatment I received a bill for $450! (and this was in 1974!) I was not seen by a doctor either, just an intern. At that rate the cost of such treatment in an ER at today's rate would be $4,500!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by twinkiedooter

IWho the blazes can afford $800 for a family a month for insurance? That's downright obscene if you ask me. $9,600 a year AND a $2,000 deductible on top of that besides. Yeow!! I am quite sure you could have put that money towards something better other than insurance.

---

Well, my cost is about $240 every two weeks. It cost my employer about $800 per month. $240X26=$6,240/12= $520 per month of my own expense. But I can think of better things I'd like to do with the money.

My employer pays me well, and I have a low cost of living. (cheap house, all my cars are paid for $500 clunkers)

But I remember my first factory job (before they all went overseas) and I had good insurance for $25 weekly.