3221

This is what I would have done:

Any American who wishes to opt-out of this program can, though they would be required to get private health insurance.

All Americans who opt into public healthcare pay 6% of their income above poverty-level as a premium , and would have a 10% deductible. The healthcare would be fairly average.

Medicaid for the poor would be abolished in place of this program.

It would cost, but I think it would have worked with reasonable efficiency.

3222

A few years ago I had a bike accident on a bridge (I braked really hard to avoid a pedestrian who stepped into the path of my bike). I booked an appointment with my family doctor the same morning to make sure I didn’t break a rib (I landed on my mountain bike’s handle bar). My doctor said I lucked out and landed on cartilage. He sent me to a X-Ray clinic in the same medical building to make sure.

My medical bill to see the doctor and get an X-ray? $0.00. Everything was paid by the British Columbia government’s Medical Service Plan (MSP). My monthly premium is about $60 (deducted from my paycheque). Oh, the BC government has the PharmaCare plan, which covers most prescription drugs.

I don’t hate “socialism” at all.

3223

6% are you fucking kidding me? That would have been double what my coverage cost when I lived in the US.

3224

And with Kaiser it would have been a $5 copay as well, whether you went to the ER or to a doctor.

I’m not sure why it’s controversial that breaking a bone is something you would go to a hospital for and not a clinic. The only thing that seems to be controversial is whether you should have to pay a $100 copay for that. Also I’m not sure how a referral would be cheaper. Generally speaking to get a referral the doctor has to see you. That’s $50. Ok, now you go to where you were referred to. Ok, that’s another $50. Overall, in medical terms, $100 isn’t very much although I think if we had a better overall medical system we could definitely get that cost down.

I’ve racked up 10’s and probably 100’s of thousands of dollars worth of medical work in the past couple years. Fortunately I did so in a very efficient health care system (Kaiser) and I only paid about $50 in copays for all that.

3225

In my experience a referral = $0 extra money. Maybe it’s changed now, as the last time I personally have seen a doctor my co-pay was $10. This was in 2008.

3226

Perhaps I’m mis-remembering or my plan was different but I seem to recall having a different copay for the ER if I was admitted than if I wasn’t. If I wasn’t admitted it was something silly like $200 as I clearly didn’t need to go the ER but if I was admitted it was only $10 or $20. You’d definitely be admitted if they suspected a broken bone. Perhaps that $100 is only if you’re not admitted?

3227

6% on non-poverty income.

For someone who makes $35k a year, living alone, that would be 6% of 24k, or $1440 a year. 120 a month for catastrophic protection is a decent deal.

I’d keep my healthcare at 180 and lower deductibles under those guidelines, but it’s close.

People who make more money would be able to afford private healthcate, but the public option would keep insurance companies from being too greedy, as excessive greed would cause more people to take the public option.

3228

So you want to tax the poor further while letting the rich get a break? Someone making $60k would end up paying less than 3% for the same coverage. Talk about regressive.

3229

I misread what you wrote (thought you said your copay was $50). Either way, evaluating anything based on this one case isn’t going to get us anywhere. It’s slightly annoying that your ER copay is so high but it does make sense that you’d go to a hospital and not a clinic. $100 is a pittance compared to the trillions of dollars we’re talking about here ($2.5 trillion spent on healthcare in the US in 2009). I’d support lowering that amount, but I think the first step is figuring out how to save a trillion or so on the overall bill.

3230

Gee government shoves through an unpopular plan in a short period of time and there end up being negative consequences because of it? Seems like how most governmental things work, I am not surprised that this health care bill was no different.

3231

I agree, they should have just passed the single payer plan and all of this would be avoided.

3232

And most Americans in the end, myself included, would end up with far worse insurance then we currently have. That would be an even worse outcome then where we are at right now.

3233

I think you are thinking of a different proposal. We were discussing single payer healthcare.

3234

Someone invoked a troll summoning. Joy.

3235

And once again another idiot comes around to call someone who disagrees a troll, for no other reason then they disagree with the person.

3236

This is speculation not born out by the evidence. Quality of health care in other first world countries which have single payer health coverage demonstrates otherwise.

I have absolutely fucking amazing insurance coverage through my employer. I would give it up in a heartbeat for a good single-payer system.

3237

How would it be worse than paying $400/mo for insurance I can’t really afford to use because the co-pays are too high?

3238

He said better insurance, not better health care.

You know, as in not as good for the insurance companies.

3239

StGabe, just so you know, not all Kaiser policies are the same. I pay a $50 co-pay under Medicare for hospital stuff, while on my son’s plan (he’s an adult and has a separate plan), he pays $250.

A friend of mine once went to Huntington Hospital in Pasadena for a routine appointment. She accidentally went into the Hospital instead of the clinic. They treated her (without saying anything about the difference). Blue Shield charged her a thousand fucking dollars because she went through the wrong door. It was insane. She got it cut down to $500 dollars because ‘they felt sorry for her’.

Why this system is better is a 100% mystery to me. Americans care about one thing, money, and after that fuck everybody (she says bitterly).

3240

Except that what you don’t seem to understand, Brett, is that the current system is unsustainable and if it had gone on ten more years with no substantial change, due to rampant medical inflation only the people working for the largest global companies would have had any health insurance at all because those companies would self-insure, and everyone else would be F’d.

And no, tax preferred medical savings accounts are not the answer because only the most affluent have the means to take advantage of them.

Of course, if you start from the position of “the Devil take the hindmost” I suppose none of these arguments mean squat to you.