2014 Health Insurance Premiums - Ouch!

[justginger]

I think this a link to this lady's experience is probably the best explanation of why I'm okay with paying higher premiums if it means I know my friends, or their friends, or the friends of their friends, ever-on-outward through the population, don't have to go through this: http://www.kameronhurley.com/the-ho...e-to-live-surviving-without-health-insurance/

A-freakin-men, Circe. This is 2013 and I'm bloody tired of the 'dog eat dog' societal attitude. I don't know how people can begrudge higher premiums when they come at a cost of what?...a diamond upgrade?...another bathroom renovation?...a third car for the family?...in exchange for keeping their fellow citizens ALIVE.

Don't get me wrong - having less money sucks. When I finish uni I'll be on that magical cusp of earning more than I do now, but falling into the next tax bracket so likely not seeing an actual change of income for a few years at least. That being said, I support programs like socialized medicine and happily put those tax dollars where my mouth and morals are.

 

[movie zombie]

.....................This is 2013 and I'm bloody tired of the 'dog eat dog' societal attitude. I don't know how people can begrudge higher premiums when they come at a cost of what?...a diamond upgrade?...another bathroom renovation?...a third car for the family?...in exchange for keeping their fellow citizens ALIVE.......

and a really big freaking AMEN to that as well!

 

[Dancing Fire]

I think this a link to this lady's experience is probably the best explanation of why I'm okay with paying higher premiums if it means I know my friends, or their friends, or the friends of their friends, ever-on-outward through the population, don't have to go through this: http://www.kameronhurley.com/the-ho...e-to-live-surviving-without-health-insurance/

A-freakin-men, Circe. This is 2013 and I'm bloody tired of the 'dog eat dog' societal attitude. I don't know how people can begrudge higher premiums when they come at a cost of what?...a diamond upgrade?...another bathroom renovation?...a third car for the family?...in exchange for keeping their fellow citizens ALIVE.

I'd agree, but with premiums skyrocketing some of us middle class citizens may not be able to afford it much longer.

 

[Beacon]

The US spends 17 percent of its GDP on health care. Ours is the largest GDP in the world. We spend more on health care per capita than any other country. Now we will spend yet more. We are are not getting results from these expenditures.

Many people do not have coverage but far more do have coverage and they have been paying for those who do not through higher and higher costs. Medicare and medicaid are also available for the elderly and the poor. These are not new programs.

The ACA may be trying to solve an important problem the wrong way. More money has NOT worked so far.

 

[Gypsy]

.....................This is 2013 and I'm bloody tired of the 'dog eat dog' societal attitude. I don't know how people can begrudge higher premiums when they come at a cost of what?...a diamond upgrade?...another bathroom renovation?...a third car for the family?...in exchange for keeping their fellow citizens ALIVE.......

and a really big freaking AMEN to that as well!

Agree. Also, premiums have been on the rise, year over year, for a while now. There is just more scrutiny this year. But last year my husband's premiums shot up 40%.

This isn't something new. It's just something that is in the spot light right now.

And yes, I am tired of people complaining about this too. And that's said with both of us working full time, with inflation kicking our tails this year (and salaries not keeping up with it at all), and penny pinching every month. The 'jeapordized' middle class is my household to a T. So for us, it's not 'disposable income' it' eats into. But still, we are in support of the Affordable Healthcare Act and happy people are getting coverage now where they were not before.

And I don't blame healthcare premiums for these problems. Or for adding to them. I put it on where it belongs: http://www.businessinsider.com/why-economic-growth-is-so-slow-2013-7 Any frankly anyone who blames healthcare premiums as the reason for the struggles of the middle class is just listening to propaganda from those who are really to blame, but will not admit it.

 

[Beacon]

What interests me is exactly where is all this money going?

Many people are seeing huge increases to their cost of health insurance. Many more will be on the exchanges buying health insurance. The government intends to subsidize the purchases of such insurance through tax dollars.

Result: billions of dollars are headed to the insurance companies. Who are the ultimate beneficiaries? The hospitals who used to have to write off the unpaid bills? The medical practitioners who will see more paid business? The insurance companies themselves through the massive premiums they are taking in? Pharma companies selling more drugs?

It will be very interesting to watch this play out. Every dollar coming out of a paycheck to buy more expensive health insurance is a dollar not spent on another household good. It adds up to a lot of money. it will add up to people losing jobs too.

Meanwhile, best thing to do is quit smoking, lose weight, exersize more. It's going to be a bumpy ride.

 

[justginger]

I think this a link to this lady's experience is probably the best explanation of why I'm okay with paying higher premiums if it means I know my friends, or their friends, or the friends of their friends, ever-on-outward through the population, don't have to go through this: http://www.kameronhurley.com/the-ho...e-to-live-surviving-without-health-insurance/

A-freakin-men, Circe. This is 2013 and I'm bloody tired of the 'dog eat dog' societal attitude. I don't know how people can begrudge higher premiums when they come at a cost of what?...a diamond upgrade?...another bathroom renovation?...a third car for the family?...in exchange for keeping their fellow citizens ALIVE.

I'd agree, but with premiums skyrocketing some of us middle class citizens may not be able to afford it much longer.

You're being melodramatic, DF. You can, and will, afford it. Think about your life - really think. What could you give up before you'd be unable to afford health care? A car? Two? Professional or recreational memberships? Expensive meals out? Holiday? Presents? Movies? Gadgets? Goodness knows you've got a whole lotta jewelry and watches you could sell! Thousands and thousands and thousands of recreational money you've spent. You're not anywhere close to "not being able to afford" anything (nor are the vast majority of ALL PSers), and suggesting otherwise is insulting to those who will have their lives SAVED by access to proper medical treatment.

 

[Beacon]

I think DF has a right to be concerned by the escalating costs he faces. We all do. Our government is accountable to o us for the allocation of our tax dollars. We also pay and have been paying, separate taxes to support Medicare, a government run health program that has been in existence for years. There is a surcharge tax on investment income to pay for Obamacare as well as a tax on medical devices as well as the increased costs we have on current insurance.

We are unwise to just emotionally claim that we must pay more or all kinds of people will die. That talk is also melodramatic.

 

[justginger]

I think DF has a right to be concerned by the escalating costs he faces. We all do. Our government is accountable to o us for the allocation of our tax dollars. We also pay and have been paying, separate taxes to support Medicare, a government run health program that has been in existence for years. There is a surcharge tax on investment income to pay for Obamacare as well as a tax on medical devices as well as the increased costs we have on current insurance.

We are unwise to just emotionally claim that we must pay more or all kinds of people will die. That talk is also melodramatic.

No, in many cases that talk is factual. People, as specifically outlined in this very thread, have relatives and friends who have died premature deaths due to lack of medical attention and insurance coverage. Not a single person here has declared bankruptcy due to overtaxation of the middle class.

There are obviously better ways to handle the finances of a program like this. Why in the world a viable, functional system that exists in Canada, Australia, France, Sweden, WHEREVER wasn't copied I have absolutely no idea. Why can it be done throughout all other developed nations, but not the States? It's obviously not rocket science - because if it were, an American institution would have already gotten it done.

But if it comes down to allowing poor citizens to continue to die without medical coverage, or paying higher taxes, I know what I'd pick. Any day, hands down.

 

[gem_anemone]

Thumbs up to justginger and Gypsy's posts! You two are much braver and more articulate than me, but I feel the same way!

 

[Beacon]

We are paying. Paying a lot. This situation is not about a shortage of money being thrown at the problem.

What I mean is that anecdotal stories of tragic cases do not provide the whole picture. I personally know a young woman, uninsured, not even a US citizen, who had all her cancer treatment paid for here in the US at minimal cost to her. Her story is different than others already posted, but her story is not the point either. There are always tales to tell at both ends of the spectrum and those tales do not constitute data sufficient to formulate an intelligent decision.

I think it is very important that citizens are able to freely express concerns about new taxation and new programs imposed by our government. To tell people they do not have the right or standing to question the government or that they are implicitly selfish for doing so is not how democracy works.

 

[movie zombie]

..............And I don't blame healthcare premiums for these problems. Or for adding to them. I put it on where it belongs: http://www.businessinsider.com/why-economic-growth-is-so-slow-2013-7 Any frankly anyone who blames healthcare premiums as the reason for the struggles of the middle class is just listening to propaganda from those who are really to blame, but will not admit it.

QFT!!!!!!

the big winners with or without the affordable healthcare act is the health care insurance companies!

 

[justginger]

We are paying. Paying a lot. This situation is not about a shortage of money being thrown at the problem.

What I mean is that anecdotal stories of tragic cases do not provide the whole picture. I personally know a young woman, uninsured, not even a US citizen, who had all her cancer treatment paid for here in the US at minimal cost to her. Her story is different than others already posted, but her story is not the point either. There are always tales to tell at both ends of the spectrum and those tales do not constitute data sufficient to formulate an intelligent decision.

I think it is very important that citizens are able to freely express concerns about new taxation and new programs imposed by our government. To tell people they do not have the right or standing to question the government or that they are implicitly selfish for doing so is not how democracy works.

Who suggested that you are unable to question the government or express concern? Goodness knows I question and critique BOTH of my governments - though I must admit the US govt earns more of my ire on a regular basis than the Australian one.

Again, I would love to see a more fiscally responsible plan put forth. I don't understand how we have a medical system here that survives, and thrives (some of my clinicians are easily banking over half a mil each year), on 1.5% income tax on individuals under $80k, and 2.5% income tax on those over $80k. Why can it not be done there? I suspect that it's because large insurance companies are taking their cuts from every direction possible -- good old big business, record profits along the way.

At this point, it appears that the majority of Americans are willing to pay what is necessary to keep their fellow citizens alive and covered though. That is how democracy works.

 

[chrono]

the big winners with or without the affordable healthcare act is the health care insurance companies!

I cannot agree with this more and this is what irks me the most.

 

[Beacon]

It is my question too: where is the money going? To the insurance companies is certainly one possibility. They were already collecting billions and now they will get billions more.

It will be interesting to follow the money trail. Hospitals themselves stand to be beneficiaries as more of their unpaid bills will be paid, at least in part.

A feature of Obamacare that seems very rational is the separation of health insurance from employment. It always seemed strange that if you did not have a job, you were basically priced out of buying insurance, even if you were not poor. It will be better if people who are self employed or unemployed can buy functional insurance.

 

[ericad]

More money spent will line the pockets of the insurance carriers. They will continue to raise premiums, unrestrained. They ARE price gouging. They have the ability to not only absorb the extra costs associated with health care reform, but to do so at lower premiums to the public. But they won't until they have to. The options are to regulate their pricing models, or to implement a free market system of competition. Reform went with option 2. Give it time and periodically shop the market. Eventually, in a year or two, smaller companies will realize that they can gain more market share by low-balling the big carriers, and then the consumers will see some real competition for their business, and prices will come down. Isn't this the fundamental logic behind free market capitalism? Ironically, the people who are the most vehemently against reform are those who love an unrestrained free market - I don't get it.

Look, I don't love the reform plan that we wound up with. I wanted more. I wanted a single payer system and a total overhaul that would mirror the socialized medicine systems you see in countries like France, Australia, Canada, UK, etc. Companies could stop paying for employee coverage and just pay their employees higher salaries instead, to help offset the additional taxes, and then everyone goes onto the single payer system. Then people with the means can buy private add-on policies if they wish, or participate in membership based practices to ensure that they get "platinum" treatment (because the rich will always be willing to pay for "bigger and better"), but a quality safety net of care would exist for all citizens, regardless of income level. How many millions of working class citizens earn too much to qualify for subsidized care, but earn too little to afford hefty family insurance premiums? A single payer system would benefit these families the most. But that didn't happen, and I happily welcome the reform we have because it's a step. A single small step in what I hope will result in many more small steps until we get it right. Because what we have right now is all kinds of wrong.

And I'm thrilled that people who were previously unable to afford or qualify for health insurance will now have access. And cost will be scaled to income. Any of us who don't qualify for a subsidy will have to suck it up and pay for it, and I believe that the majority of us can afford it. Spending our disposable income on insurance is way less fun than many other things I can think of, but shoot, I can get rid of my HBO and eat out less often if need be. I might need to trade in my Lexus or skip that winter trip to Hawaii if things get really tight. But hey, my self-employed brother, who has pre-existing conditions and has gone without insurance for more than a decade, can finally get life saving medical coverage that won't bankrupt his family. Small price to pay.

[warning, I'm about to sound super bitter with this next bit, but it's totally true]
It pains me to see my friends posting on FB with this "woe is me" attitude that their premiums are going up by a few hundred dollars a month and it's so scandalous and it's all Obama's fault. Oh really? Because just last month I enjoyed seeing the pics you posted of your family on their 3rd 5-star vacation of the year (complete with pool in background and umbrella drink in hand), and wasn't that a $100k Mercedes you just bought over the summer, with which you drive your children to private school? It seems that the people complaining the loudest, in my circle, are the ones who can well afford any increase. Of course there will be middle-class families who are walking that paycheck to paycheck line, who will need to pay more on top of their student loans and mortgages and other necessary expenses. And for them I do feel real sympathy because there ARE still many flaws in the current health care reform. But, IMO, we're going in the right direction.

 

[msop04]

[quote="msop04|1380683583|

It was my understanding under the Affordable Healthcare Act, that if you had insurance, nothing would change. You could keep your existing plan. It was only that everyone must have coverage, and those who had not been able to get coverage due to pre-existing conditions could not be turned down. All my friends had insurance that they were happy with before (or at least as happy as you can be with health care), but the benefits didn't meet the "standards" of the Affordable Healthcare Act, so tons of unnecessary benefits were added. Inpatient coverage for substance abuse was once an expensive "add-on" but is now mandatory.

And you believe it?... [/quote]

Yeaaaaahhhh... good point, Dancing Fire.

 

[ruby59]

Not pointed directly at anyone, but it is the comments connecting people's feelings about Obama Care and the fact that they have disposable income that has me shaking my head.

Just because people go on trips or have extra money for jewelry or expensive cars imo does not mean that they cannot question a major policy affecting their lives. I am all for everyone being able to have medical care but you cannot deny that Obama Care is not perfect, and there are still too many unanswered questions and bugs in the system for it to have been implemented at this time. And this is coming from someone who has preexisting conditions (plural) and had a dificult time getting insurance.

Just because my husband and I worked hard all our lives and now can celebrate with the fruit of our labors does not mean we cannot question Obama Care.

 

[ericad]

Not pointed directly at anyone, but it is the comments connecting people's feelings about Obama Care and the fact that they have disposable income that has me shaking my head.

Just because people go on trips or have extra money for jewelry or expensive cars imo does not mean that they cannot question a major policy affecting their lives. I am all for everyone being able to have medical care but you cannot deny that Obama Care is not perfect, there are still many unanswered questions and bugs in the system, and as a rule there is a lot of waste in government. And this is coming from someone who have preexisting conditions (plural) and had a dificult time getting insurance.

Just because my husband and I worked hard all our lives and now can celebrate with the fruit of our labors does not mean we cannot question Obama Care.

For me specifically, my feelings about this issue have to do with people being so melodramatic about price increases that they can well afford, but you're correct that we should question WHY the carriers are jacking up prices, and we should push back because where do you draw the line? And yes, it's imperfect, and will likely be so for many years to come. I just get annoyed when I see wealthy people post that their premiums went up a little and it's all Obama's fault and he should be impeached, etc. (and I've seen people say far worse things about our president.) But I don't see any of these people blaming the for-profit insurance carriers or questioning them whatsoever. Some people even paint the highly profitable corporate insurance carriers as victims of Obamacare. Yeah, they're crying all the way to the bank.

This takes the focus off of what's good about reform and to hear so many people (not on this thread, but in general) make the claim that it should be completely unwound because the near term result is that it will cost consumers more is not the solution. Instead let's drill down and demand to know where this additional money is going. Is it going to line corporate pockets? If so, the problem we should have is with the carriers, and not with reform as a concept.

 

[ericad]

To further color my position, my husband is French. My parents are foreign and both come from countries with socialized health care. This is the standard against which I critique our system. In France, people pay very high taxes, and they do so happily. In the US, our taxes are very low by comparison, and we insist on a system of private health care, yet complain that a reform measure that will provide insurance to tens of millions of citizens of this country who are currently at risk of death or bankruptcy (often both) due to lack of insurance will, in the near term, cost us a bit more out of the pockets of people who have the means to pay it.

Does it suck that we lose some of our disposable income? Yes. I'd rather spend it on other things, and I hope to see the current spazz-out in the marketplace self correct in the short term, once the dust settles. And if it doesn't, I hope that we push back on the carriers and demand to know where this additional money is being utilized. One of my biggest beefs with the current reform model is that there's no regulation of the carriers' pricing models. We're at their mercy when it comes to premiums, and they're currently pretty pissed off about health care reform.

 

[msop04]

Look, I don't love the reform plan that we wound up with. I wanted more. I wanted a single payer system and a total overhaul that would mirror the socialized medicine systems you see in countries like France, Australia, Canada, UK, etc. Companies could stop paying for employee coverage and just pay their employees higher salaries instead, to help offset the additional taxes, and then everyone goes onto the single payer system. Then people with the means can buy private add-on policies if they wish, or participate in membership based practices to ensure that they get "platinum" treatment (because the rich will always be willing to pay for "bigger and better"), but a quality safety net of care would exist for all citizens, regardless of income level. How many millions of working class citizens earn too much to qualify for subsidized care, but earn too little to afford hefty family insurance premiums? A single payer system would benefit these families the most. But that didn't happen, and I happily welcome the reform we have because it's a step. A single small step in what I hope will result in many more small steps until we get it right. Because what we have right now is all kinds of wrong.

I, too, would love to see this happen -- but don't hold your breath. Hopefully, you are right and this is a step toward that. And, yes, I agree that what we have is "all kinds of wrong." Also, who gets to pay for this platinum care that everyone is to receive?? It's those who have always paid for everything -- those who actually work and contribute... the tax-paying, working citizens. I am all for it if everyone contributes (and I'm speaking of those who are able, not disabled citizens). We currently have several GENERATIONS of people that live off of the government because we allow it, not because it's necessary to their survival. They have big screen TVs (plural), drive sports cars (plural), wear designer clothes and they carry iPhones. They are in front of me at the supermarket checkout line with 2 heaping grocery carts packed full of steaks, potato chips, ice cream and talk about throwing a block party with all of it! These people use their "food stamp" cards to get cash then go and pay for cigarettes and alcohol. I see it every day. I have a huge problem with giving those who defraud the system a "platinum plan." Do we really think they are ever going to contribute?? ...certainly not if they are not made to.

Sorry for the tangent.

[warning, I'm about to sound super bitter with this next bit, but it's totally true]
It pains me to see my friends posting on FB with this "woe is me" attitude that their premiums are going up by a few hundred dollars a month and it's so scandalous and it's all Obama's fault. Oh really? Because just last month I enjoyed seeing the pics you posted of your family on their 3rd 5-star vacation of the year (complete with pool in background and umbrella drink in hand), and wasn't that a $100k Mercedes you just bought over the summer, with which you drive your children to private school? It seems that the people complaining the loudest, in my circle, are the ones who can well afford any increase. Of course there will be middle-class families who are walking that paycheck to paycheck line, who will need to pay more on top of their student loans and mortgages and other necessary expenses. And for them I do feel real sympathy because there ARE still many flaws in the current health care reform. But, IMO, we're going in the right direction.

ericad, I don't blame you at all for feeling bitter if this is truly what you see on FB or whatever... however, that's just not the case with everyone. I don't know anyone who vacations in Hawaii or lives the "high life" you describe in your post. Yes, two of my friends of whom I speak do drive nice cars, but hardly Mercedes or BMWs. None of them live extravagant lifestyles or send their children to private school... So, that may describe your experience with this or your friends/family, but please don't assume that's the reality for everyone who is not happy about all of this. I've worked in health care for 13 years and I've seen many people on Medicaid drive a much nicer car than I do, hair all done, nails done, eating Chick-Fil-A... it makes me furious that we as taxpayers are paying for that while they do absolutely nothing but procreate for their government check to increase each month. However, I'm not so naive to believe that this is the norm.

I do believe that health care needs to be available to everyone, however I don't believe that the government should make all the decisions for us, set the cost, and mandate what coverage we should have. I don't mean that cars and lives are the same, so don't get me wrong... Look at car insurance... you are required by law to have at least liability if you own a car. It is the law. It is not mandated by the government that you have a policy that includes full auto-body repair if in a collision, wax jobs to keep your paint fresh, and mandatory oil changes at the government's discretion.

Money has been thrown at health care for years... if the government would monitor Medicaid/Medicare fraud and cut off those who are so openly abusing the system, then we may just be able to save enough to use toward a beneficial program for everyone, not continue to simply spend more and go into endless debt.

 

[msop04]

To further color my position, my husband is French. My parents are foreign and both come from countries with socialized health care. This is the standard against which I critique our system. In France, people pay very high taxes, and they do so happily. In the US, our taxes are very low by comparison, and we insist on a system of private health care, yet complain that a reform measure that will provide insurance to tens of millions of citizens of this country who are currently at risk of death or bankruptcy (often both) due to lack of insurance will, in the near term, cost us a bit more out of the pockets of people who have the means to pay it.

Wow, I'd like to know what the tax is in France! Do the French implement a flat tax or is it based on income? I know that I pay 30% right out of the gate, so I don't think that is "low," especially when there are those who pay nothing... not to mention those who pay like 5% or less and make millions. I am all in favor of a flat tax. It's just fair IMO. I would happily pay higher taxes on goods, since it's my choice whether or not I buy them. But I do have a problem with the unfair spread of income taxes in the US.

Does it suck that we lose some of our disposable income? Yes. I'd rather spend it on other things, and I hope to see the current spazz-out in the marketplace self correct in the short term, once the dust settles. And if it doesn't, I hope that we push back on the carriers and demand to know where this additional money is being utilized. One of my biggest beefs with the current reform model is that there's no regulation of the carriers' pricing models. We're at their mercy when it comes to premiums, and they're currently pretty pissed off about health care reform.

I totally agree. I hope that you are correct, and this will come to pass.

 

[ericad]

Msop, I think I was clear in my post that I do NOT feel that everyone is in this situation (very high income). But what I do see on FB is distasteful - people complaining about the cost of Obamacare, yelling that he should be impeached, imprisoned, tortured (yes, I've seen people say such things) because their premiums went up a little bit, and then in the next breath they're posting pics of the expensive $200+ sushi meal they just had at a fancy-pants restaurant. When I said "my circle" I meant FB circle, and not to imply family/close friends.

As for the "platinum" plan, I meant that there should be a decent government option, and then people who want to pay out of pocket for private add-on options can do so. This is what they have in France and it works. It appeases the "haves" while protecting the "have not's".

As to your point about entitlement recipients, I honestly don't lose sleep over it. That's a different system that needs overhaul, but has no bearing on health care reform. They are 2 separate issues. It's about the greater good - more people will be helped by health care reform 1000 times over than will take advantage of it. I believe that access to affordable medical care should be a right of citizenship. Any beef I have with other entitlement programs is a different matter. I put health care in the same bucket as public education, the postal service, social security and medicare. I don't put it in the food stamps/welfare bucket.

 

[ericad]

Income tax in France ranges from 0% to 75% (from memory), with the highest earners paying the highest tax rates. At our current household income, I think we'd be at 30% (maybe 45%?), plus property taxes, etc., minus our itemized deductions. I don't know what, if any, itemized deductions they allow in France, so it's possible that their effective tax rate is much higher than our post-itemized effective rate, even if the 30% bracket is the same.

 

[ericad]

Closing corporate tax loopholes would be a huge step towards a more fair system of taxation in the US, IMO, in addition to a flat tax rate. I'm with you on that, msop!

 

[Circe]

Erica, I am liking your posts so much - bravo.

The specific point that stands out to me is one made upthread concerning the money - Gypsy, Beacon, I think you're both right. The problem IS the lack of oversight that gives large corporations free reign to chisel their customers, abuse their workers, and reward management and only management (and even a casual glance at the ever-growing division between rich and poor in this country shows that that goes for a lot more than the insurance companies, frankly). I will be curious to see how all of this plays out over the next five years or so. Will regulations be imposed on the insurance companies?

 

[recordaras]

I believe that access to affordable medical care should be a right of citizenship.

As somebody who has lived most of my life in countries with "socialized healthcare", I completely agree with this. People in one of the richest countries in the world should not be going bankrupt and losing all their life savings just because their child got sick.

 

[msop04]

Msop, I think I was clear in my post that I do NOT feel that everyone is in this situation (very high income). But what I do see on FB is distasteful - people complaining about the cost of Obamacare, yelling that he should be impeached, imprisoned, tortured (yes, I've seen people say such things) because their premiums went up a little bit, and then in the next breath they're posting pics of the expensive $200+ sushi meal they just had at a fancy-pants restaurant. When I said "my circle" I meant FB circle, and not to imply family/close friends.

As for the "platinum" plan, I meant that there should be a decent government option, and then people who want to pay out of pocket for private add-on options can do so. This is what they have in France and it works. It appeases the "haves" while protecting the "have not's".

As to your point about entitlement recipients, I honestly don't lose sleep over it. That's a different system that needs overhaul, but has no bearing on health care reform. They are 2 separate issues. It's about the greater good - more people will be helped by health care reform 1000 times over than will take advantage of it. I believe that access to affordable medical care should be a right of citizenship. Any beef I have with other entitlement programs is a different matter. I put health care in the same bucket as public education, the postal service, social security and medicare. I don't put it in the food stamps/welfare bucket.

I would be upset to see those posts as well, as I feel that's distasteful to act in such a way... but that's my opinion. And, I understand the FB circle doesn't imply true "friends."

I don't lose a lot of sleep over these things, but it is aggravating to be denied coverage on a prescription for an actual disorder or illness (not elective), then turn around and fill Viagra to be paid in full for a Medicaid patient. Will I live? Of course, but with a longer duration and less effective treatment full of unpleasant side effects... Clearly, I'm okay with that or I would've shelled out almost a grand for the original Rx, but... I can guarantee you the other guy wouldn't have paid the $385 for his Viagra. Just saying... it hits home sometimes.

These two are separate issues, yet they are all tied to money. Government tax dollars that could surely be better spent -- toward all of the programs you listed above. It all comes back to money. Doesn't it always?

I, too, agree that healthcare should be a right of citizenship. And I believe that if you are not a citizen of this country, then you should not be eligible. However, it is my belief that US health care will go the way of every other government plan, and be "gifted" to everyone, regardless of citizenship.

I know that what I'm about to post may ruffle some feathers, but it's how I truly feel... If you are not a citizen of the US and do not pay federal/state income taxes, you should not share the right to vote. It is a clear conflict of interests.

 

[amc80]

Money has been thrown at health care for years... if the government would monitor Medicaid/Medicare fraud and cut off those who are so openly abusing the system, then we may just be able to save enough to use toward a beneficial program for everyone, not continue to simply spend more and go into endless debt.

Yes! I have no problem paying a little extra so those who truly need health care can get it. Just like I have no problem paying for social programs for those who truly (and mostly temporarily) need them. What I don't like is having to pay a significant amount more towards what is likely just a band-aid in a broken system. Even if they said "hey, we are going to raise everyone's taxes for a few years because we are completely revamping the system and to do so costs money"...great!

And, speaking of fraud, has anyone out there read "Pimps, Whores, and Welfare Brats" by Star Parker?

 

[msop04]

Income tax in France ranges from 0% to 75% (from memory), with the highest earners paying the highest tax rates. At our current household income, I think we'd be at 30% (maybe 45%?), plus property taxes, etc., minus our itemized deductions. I don't know what, if any, itemized deductions they allow in France, so it's possible that their effective tax rate is much higher than our post-itemized effective rate, even if the 30% bracket is the same.

If I remember correctly, I don't think there are tax deductions there... but I may be way off base. This is very interesting. I don't feel that higher earners should have to pay a lot higher percentage in taxes. I think that maybe it would be more fair to have a flat 15% or so up until the $250K mark, then maybe 20ish%, but not to exceed 30% for anyone. This is all dreaming, of course... maybe one day we'll find an answer. Hopefully.