Medicare For All

[KEW]

We had a great health care system till Obama stepped in and messed it up. Causing most people premiums to skyrocket 400% to 700%.

How about a source for the accuracy of this statement?
I certainly have not seen that nor has any of my friends or family.
Maybe I (and family/friends) am lucky! If so show me the data so we can go out and celebrate our good fortune!

 

[Irvrobinson]

She is ahead of Biden in the polls. And, better read it again.

Warren, liar that she is on a state bar application, is a non-starter for me, no matter what her standing. I don't need to read it again. I comprehended the stupid nature of it the first time. And I've read the original bill submitted by Sanders. Have you?

I celebrate people who are successful. I don't demonize them and try to confiscate what they've earned legally. Taking those who are richer than me down doesn't make me richer. I don't care what Warren and Sanders say.

If you want something to bitch about, take a look at charitable foundations in the US. A great way to hide your money from taxation forever, still have control over it, build great edifices to yourself (the Gates Foundation building cost ~$450M),employ your extended families at high salaries, all at a cost of giving away only 5% per year to whatever you say needs your money. It amazes me the the Ford Foundation, the Getty Foundation, and the Rockefeller Foundation are still around. The people who founded them have been dead for longer than I've been alive.

 

[Out-Of-Phase]

I just want and need affordable universal health care. And there are many, many Americans who agree with me.

 

[Irvrobinson]

I just want and need affordable universal health care. And there are many, many Americans who agree with me.

That's a great goal. We just don't agree that nationalizing the healthcare system is the way to go about it.

 

[Out-Of-Phase]

Good points. President Obama needed to institute the affordable universal health care coverage act instead of the affordable care act.

 

[Ponzio]

I think we can all agree that the current health care system isn't working for anyone unless you can afford it.

I've been thru the meat grinder the last 15 years, the last 8 on disability, with various surgeries, prescription/injection therapies, etc. and the cost/protocols are just outlandish and sometimes downright dangerous to your health.

As an example a 1/2 hour procedure alone to verify my hypertension with one doctor (pulmonary specialist) and two assistant's cost $27,000 +, just to prove to the insurance company that my right aorta is dilated to 4 times its normal size and put me back on the medication that had my very mild hypertension under control for the last 8 years.

Think about that for a second. The insurance company actually cost themselves more money by denying me access to the drug first of all that had it under control and in the intervening 8 months my right aorta dilated to 4 times its normal size and now I have severe hypertension, which in the long run will cost them more money to maintain, never mind that I can't now barely walk 150 feet to my mailbox without stopping once or twice to catch my breath. My doctor apologized but it was out of his hands. Idiocy at its best.

Sadly I could go on all day with examples of the incompetence of the health insurance providers, the frustration of the doctors who are not able to provide the correct procedures or medication(s) and the greed of the health care system overall.

BTW, tort reform also needs to be seriously addressed before universal health care can be implemented.

 

[Out-Of-Phase]

Sorry Ponzio, I wish you better days ahead.

 

[highfigh]

Senator Elizabeth Warren, Democratic candidate for President in 2020.

Medicare for all - Health care is a right.

No new taxes on the middle-class.

I'm in, you should be too.

Her plan will never work- who will pay for it?

She's pandering, nothing more. The cost that I have seen for this is $52 Trillion- nobody has a real concept of that amount of money. Sure, they can say it's fifty two thousand billions or that it has twelve zeros, but in a practical way, no. They think they're on one side of the equation and the cost is on another side. This will bankrupt the country- nothing in the history of the World has ever cost $52T dollars, even adjusting for inflation.

The reason health care is so expensive is that the health insurers are in the middle- get them out or change the way they're paid and this will be much easier to handle. Health care providers want to treat patients- who is denying coverage? Insurers. Who jacks up the rates? Insurers. Who drops out f the market when they can't make enough money? Insurers. Who builds fancy new headquarters when they have a few good years? Insurers. Who buys naming rights to sports facilities? Insurers.

What does all of that money do, to treat people who need health care? Not a damn thing.

 

[highfigh]

Remember, there are much less than 1,000 billionaires in the US to tax, so conspiracies are practical. That means the revenues from the wealth tax would go down, but the cost of the promised programs wouldn't, so then there'd be a massive deficit which would have to funded, or massive inflation. Assuming Warren doesn't want inflation to reduce her own wealth, the tax base would have to be broadened, probably to include every old geezer with more than a million dollars in assets, which might mean you, because after the top 0.01% old geezers hold most of the country's wealth. And with good reason, they've had a lifetime to save for retirement. Remember, there are trillions in 401K and IRA accounts to tax, and most Americans don't have a million dollars. I can hear the arguments already.

The richest family in the country, probably the world, is the Walton family, poster children for unearned wealth. Their total net worth is about $200 billion. Confiscate it all and you still have only, what, $30 trillion or so to go? And that's just for Medicare for All.

Which geezers are you referring to- Gates, Bezos, Mark Zuckerberg, Larry Page, Sergey Brin, Julia Koch and McKenzie Zuckerberg are worth an estimated $475 Billion and the oldest of them is Gates, at 64. The average age is 50 years, 52 days.

This link shows that the total of all wealth in the US is $98 Trillion. That includes the little people, too.

Her plan is to levy a 2% tax on net worth over $50 Million and 3% on net worth over $1 Billion. This also means that several members of Congress will have to pay this and they're almost equally Republican or Democrat. This includes the Clintons, so I expect to see a shovel and a bag of lime in her future.

 

[Out-Of-Phase]

I realize her plan is controversial, but we need to start somewhere. We don't have Senator Ted Kennedy to help us all with his universal health care plan anymore.

 

[Irvrobinson]

Which geezers are you referring to- Gates, Bezos, Mark Zuckerberg, Larry Page, Sergey Brin, Julia Koch and McKenzie Zuckerberg are worth an estimated $475 Billion and the oldest of them is Gates, at 64. The average age is 50 years, 52 days.

This link shows that the total of all wealth in the US is $98 Trillion. That includes the little people, too.

Her plan is to levy a 2% tax on net worth over $50 Million and 3% on net worth over $1 Billion. This also means that several members of Congress will have to pay this and they're almost equally Republican or Democrat. This includes the Clintons, so I expect to see a shovel and a bag of lime in her future.

The geezers I was referring to are people near or at retirement who have considerable funds, like about $1M, in IRA. 401K, and 403b retirement accounts. That number is probably somewhere between 500,000 and a million people, and there are millions more who have between $500,000 and a million dollars. It is my thesis that the wealth tax will generate nowhere near as much income as Warren and her economists claim and she will then have to go after the merely well-off. And the majority of these assets are in retirement accounts.

I profoundly hate Warren's plan. It includes two concepts that are IMO un-American. First is that obnoxious wealth tax, which I believe will, like AMT before it, be applied very broadly as it fails to raise the revenue it promises, and mark-to-market, which taxes unrealized capital gains on stocks. Warren and her economists (and that idiot senator Ron Wyden) use the argument that real estate taxes already do this and we all accept them, but real estate has nowhere near the volatility of equities, meaning you could pay taxes on a unrealized gain and have a loss the next business day.

The plan also includes a transaction tax on equities. 0.1%, how bad could it be? For one thing, taxes never stay low, and for another she targets it at "the top 1% of households". Now how will she do that? Wealth or income? If wealth, will we all have to have our wealth appraised?

Her plan includes a massive range of tax increases, all of which will be passed on to every consumer. It also includes the provisions of the Sanders plan, which uses "compulsory licensing" for drug patents when the Pharma companies don't comply with their arbitrary pricing demands, so drug industry investment will plummet.

The rays of hope if Warren is somehow elected is that Congress won't approved these obnoxious plans, and that even it does the Supreme Court will rule most of this nonsense unconstitutional. And the combined arguments may take years. On the other hand I see and hear a lot of people supporting it because they think they can have other people pay for it and not them. So stupid.

 

[Irvrobinson]

I realize her plan is controversial, but we need to start somewhere. We don't have Senator Ted Kennedy to help us all with his universal health care plan anymore.

You know a populist plan is ill-conceived when even the New York Times can't get on board:

Opinion | Elizabeth Warren’s Health Care Albatross (Published 2019)

How a more ideological Democratic Party might trap its nominee.

www.nytimes.com

 

[Irvrobinson]

BTW, tort reform also needs to be seriously addressed before universal health care can be implemented.

Why is that?

 

[Out-Of-Phase]

You know a populist plan is ill-conceived when even the New York Times can't get on board:

Opinion | Elizabeth Warren’s Health Care Albatross (Published 2019)

How a more ideological Democratic Party might trap its nominee.

www.nytimes.com

Nice try, Irv. Ross Douthat is a conservative columnist on a very liberal newspaper. Oil and water.

 

[Ponzio]

Why is that?

Because the cost of liability insurance for doctors is astronomical and the current system of compensating victims of malpractice is all over the place. My sister-in-law who lost her lower right leg due to the doctor/surgeon misdiagnosis, even after his collegues notified him of his mistake, was awarded $1.5 million by a jury. That very same day another victim was awarded $750K for also losing his lower left leg by another doctor by another jury . The difference, their lawyers and the juries.

My neighbor across the street, who's a doctor, and his brother, also a MD, sold their practice to go work for the state for two reasons mainly to hear him describe it. The inability to treat patients properly, dealing with the health insurance companies, and the constantly rising cost of liability insurance. He also mentioned tort reform as an issue.

Irv, can I assume that you feel everything is peachy keen with the health care system in place? If so, whatever you do don't get sick my friend.

 

[Irvrobinson]

Nice try, Irv. Ross Douthat is a conservative columnist on a very liberal newspaper. Oil and water.

Oh really? How about Paul Krugman in the same day? Is he left-leaning enough for you?

Opinion | Did Warren Pass the Medicare Test? I Think So (Published 2019)

Her plan is serious, even if it probably won’t happen.

www.nytimes.com

Although the damned fool is endorsing mark-to-market, which is so typical of your-wealth-should-be-ours mentality. He is such a hypocrite. If he so fervently believes his taxes aren't high enough, start paying now. The Treasury puts an address in the 1040 instructions you can send your donations to. Warren Buffet, Krugman, Bill Gates (who hides a good portion of his wealth in the world's largest charitable foundation), Benioff, and all of the other big talkers, start now. Or how about Warren and Sanders? Start now. Why not?

 

[Irvrobinson]

Because the cost of liability insurance for doctors is astronomical and the current system of compensating victims of malpractice is all over the place. My sister-in-law who lost her lower right leg due to the doctor/surgeon misdiagnosis, even after his collegues notified him of his mistake, was awarded $1.5 million by a jury. That very same day another victim was awarded $750K for also losing his lower left leg by another doctor by another jury . The difference, their lawyers and the juries.

My neighbor across the street, who's a doctor, and his brother, also a MD, sold their practice to go work for the state for two reasons mainly to hear him describe it. The inability to treat patients properly, dealing with the health insurance companies, and the constantly rising cost of liability insurance. He also mentioned tort reform as an issue.

What do you suggest as a solution?

 

[GO-NAD!]

The geezers I was referring to are people near or at retirement who have considerable funds, like about $1M, in IRA. 401K, and 403b retirement accounts. That number is probably somewhere between 500,000 and a million people, and there are millions more who have between $500,000 and a million dollars. It is my thesis that the wealth tax will generate nowhere near as much income as Warren and her economists claim and she will then have to go after the merely well-off. And the majority of these assets are in retirement accounts.

I profoundly hate Warren's plan. It includes two concepts that are IMO un-American. First is that obnoxious wealth tax, which I believe will, like AMT before it, be applied very broadly as it fails to raise the revenue it promises, and mark-to-market, which taxes unrealized capital gains on stocks. Warren and her economists (and that idiot senator Ron Wyden) use the argument that real estate taxes already do this and we all accept them, but real estate has nowhere near the volatility of equities, meaning you could pay taxes on a unrealized gain and have a loss the next business day.

The plan also includes a transaction tax on equities. 0.1%, how bad could it be? For one thing, taxes never stay low, and for another she targets it at "the top 1% of households". Now how will she do that? Wealth or income? If wealth, will we all have to have our wealth appraised?

Her plan includes massive range of tax increases, all of which will be passed on to every consumer. It also includes the provisions of the Sanders plan, which uses "compulsory licensing" for drug patents when the Pharma companies don't comply with their arbitrary pricing demands, so drug industry investment will plummet.

The rays of hope if Warren is somehow elected is that Congress won't approved these obnoxious plans, and that even it does the Supreme Court will rule most of this nonsense unconstitutional. And the combined arguments may take years. On the other hand I see and hear a lot of people supporting it because they think they can have other people pay for it and not them. So stupid.

I have to agree with you Irv, that Warren's plan doesn't look workable. If she's elected, it probably won't make it past the cutting room floor. Other developed countries implemented universal health care systems during an era when it was more do-able. But, it looks like the current system is so deeply entrenched in the US, that the massive transformation that Warren envisions would take decades. And yes, funding it will be problematic. Make no mistake, I support universal health care, but I can't see this proposal getting you there.

That said, if I was an American voter, the Democrats would have to field a re-incarnated Stalin as a presidential candidate, before I could be persuaded to vote for the incumbent. Just saying.

 

[Irvrobinson]

That said, if I was an American voter, the Democrats would have to field a re-incarnated Stalin as a presidential candidate, before I could be persuaded to vote for the incumbent. Just saying.

That is pretty much what I thought until I saw Warren and Sanders leading. I'm also afraid that Biden wouldn't have the balls to stand up to the socialist contingent in his party, but I think he's pretty much out of it.

It would be nice if the Republicans came out with a more practical healthcare plan, but alas, I suspect they think they have the election in the bag so long as Trump strikes a trade deal with China.

 

[KEW]

Because the cost of liability insurance for doctors is astronomical and the current system of compensating victims of malpractice is all over the place. My sister-in-law who lost her lower right leg due to the doctor/surgeon misdiagnosis, even after his collegues notified him of his mistake, was awarded $1.5 million by a jury. That very same day another victim was awarded $750K for also losing his lower left leg by another doctor by another jury . The difference, their lawyers and the juries.

My neighbor across the street, who's a doctor, and his brother, also a MD, sold their practice to go work for the state for two reasons mainly to hear him describe it. The inability to treat patients properly, dealing with the health insurance companies, and the constantly rising cost of liability insurance. He also mentioned tort reform as an issue.

Given what you have said, I do wonder of the fine for your sister's doctor might have been greater in part because he persisted in the malpractice despite being notified that he was making a mistake. I would consider that a greater crime than a misdiagnosis without other implications.

The one thing that Sanders and Warren say on this topic that makes sense is the amount of cost added to our medical care in the form of Insurance operating costs and profits. It is a big "if", but it seems entirely possible that a medical group could get together and develop a "best practices" manual to determine what should be covered by health care. In a way Kaiser Permanente has already proven the concept.
However, my point is there is a lot of "healthcare money" being wasted on insurance which is non-productive to delivering medical care! Between that and pharmaceuticals gaming the political system we should be able to do better. At least, given how much healthcare cost in the US, you would think we had superior results; however that is not the case by a sizable margin!