Clinton's & Obama's Universal Health Care Plans

Make no mistake, I'm not paranoid whatsoever and I'm very compassionate towards others. You are making an assumption on what you read here, not what you would see IRL - pretty biased assumption IMO.

I never said I don't think people deserve health insurance and that nothing needs to be done. My point, for the 100th time is I do not believe UHC is the answer. Regulation of the insurance industry, etc, etc would be more of the answer so then it can be affordable for those who can't afford it now. Letting the government pay for it is NOT the answer.

And if I'm not mistaken don't you have the philosphy that everything Republicans touch turns to you know what? You've had that mentality since Bush came in to office.

So WHO is going to pay for those who go with the government's plan? The government isn't going to tax me more? They must have a stock pile of money sitting somewhere that I'm not aware of.

Like I said at first, the government will have to budget this in their annual budget and it will be high the first couple of years. But they will be able to fit it in (considering the billions they spend on other things --- uhm the war for example). But this will not cause a raise in your taxes to cover it. After a few years premiums will continue to lower (in terms of the rate with inflation) and the burden on the goverment will be lower so it will work it self out completely.

Make no mistake, I'm not paranoid whatsoever and I'm very compassionate towards others. You are making an assumption on what you read here, not what you would see IRL - pretty biased assumption IMO.

I never said I don't think people deserve health insurance and that nothing needs to be done. My point, for the 100th time is I do not believe UHC is the answer. Regulation of the insurance industry, etc, etc would be more of the answer so then it can be affordable for those who can't afford it now. Letting the government pay for it is NOT the answer.

And if I'm not mistaken don't you have the philosphy that everything Republicans touch turns to you know what? You've had that mentality since Bush came in to office.

Karen they are going to regulate the insurance companies. Forcing them to accept everyone regardless of any pre-existing conditions is one of them. Did you read the link I posted?

Here is a quote:
Available: No discrimination. The insurance companies can't deny you coverage if you have a pre-existing condition.

Insurance companies won't be able to deny you coverage or drop you because their computer model says you're not worth it. They will have to offer and renew coverage to anyone who applies and pays their premium. And like other things that you buy, they will have to compete for your business based on quality and price. Families will have the security of knowing that if they become ill or lose their jobs, they won't lose their coverage.

It will be the same company/plan that members congress and their familys currently have it will just now be open to everyone at a set lower rate than any current private insurance company. Goverment will match your premiums based on your income (which is the only thing in question right now is how much based). I was "told" a typical family of 4 would be $2500/yr but that will cover EVERYTHING and no high deductable. Now private insurance especially group plans are going to have to compete for that or anyone who happens to be paying a much higher premium will opt for the government's group plan and so not to loose so many customers they are going to have to lower their premiums and probably really try to offer very lower HSA plans. When I say very low I am talking probably as low as $50 a month along side a HSA with a small deductable. Many younger people will probably opt for a plan like that instead of the governments plan.

You still didn't answer my question as to who will administer this national plan.

I do not really understand your question... The insurance company will administer it. If you choose the some plans member of congress then it will be that insurance carrier if you choose a public plan such as medicare than it will be medicare who will administer it.
The government is just opening this up and will give tax credits (or basically the same as how the company you work for matches premiums in their group plans).

My question is why do you think lobbyists and such are trying to use scare tactics so it doesn't go through. Make no mistake about it, the insurance companies WILL get back what they lose in lowering premiums for competition AND the government will make sure they do. They just like to make it look like they are doing good for the people and hurting the insurance companies. You really do not know how the system works - spend some time in it - I guaranty you'll see it in a new light.

Karen they are going to regulate the insurance companies. Forcing them to accept everyone regardless of any pre-existing conditions is one of them. Did you read the link I posted?

Here is a quote:
Insurance companies won't be able to deny you coverage or drop you because their computer model says you're not worth it. They will have to offer and renew coverage to anyone who applies and pays their premium. And like other things that you buy, they will have to compete for your business based on quality and price. Families will have the security of knowing that if they become ill or lose their jobs, they won't lose their coverage.

There is more to it than regulating the insurance companies to force pre-exisiting conditions. I did read the link

You are not any of those things and as long as you know it, don't be offended.

I'm not offended. I see first hand how the system works. I didn't before I got involved in it. I was clueless and uneducated and when I got around the "system" was when I got a real eye opener. I don't even work in the health industry, I work in the P&C industry so I, for one, am not using any scare tactics to get people not to agree with UHC.

It will be the same company/plan that members congress and their familys currently have it will just now be open to everyone at a set lower rate than any current private insurance company. Goverment will match your premiums based on your income (which is the only thing in question right now is how much based). I was "told" a typical family of 4 would be $2500/yr but that will cover EVERYTHING and no high deductable. Now private insurance especially group plans are going to have to compete for that or anyone who happens to be paying a much higher premium will opt for the government's group plan and so not to loose so many customers they are going to have to lower their premiums and probably really try to offer very lower HSA plans. When I say very low I am talking probably as low as $50 a month along side a HSA with a small deductable. Many younger people will probably opt for a plan like that instead of the governments plan.

You still didn't answer my question as to who will administer this national plan.

I do not really understand your question... The insurance company will administer it. If you choose the some plans member of congress then it will be that insurance carrier if you choose a public plan such as medicare than it will be medicare who will administer it.
The government is just opening this up and will give tax credits (or basically the same as how the company you work for matches premiums in their group plans).

My question is why do you think lobbyists and such are trying to use scare tactics so it doesn't go through. Make no mistake about it, the insurance companies WILL get back what they lose in lowering premiums for competition AND the government will make sure they do. They just like to make it look like they are doing good for the people and hurting the insurance companies. You really do not know how the system works - spend some time in it - I guaranty you'll see it in a new light.

At first, they are not going to want it to go through because of the regulations they will now have to follow such as not denying converage due to a pre-existing condition or try to deny coverage as you get older, etc. This will hurt their profits at first because everyone that is not being covered due to a pre-existing condition will now get coverage. This will eventually work this out as they gain more customers. But again will definitely lower their profits at first and they are afraid of that.

It will be the same company/plan that members congress and their familys currently have it will just now be open to everyone at a set lower rate than any current private insurance company. Goverment will match your premiums based on your income (which is the only thing in question right now is how much based). I was "told" a typical family of 4 would be $2500/yr but that will cover EVERYTHING and no high deductable. Now private insurance especially group plans are going to have to compete for that or anyone who happens to be paying a much higher premium will opt for the government's group plan and so not to loose so many customers they are going to have to lower their premiums and probably really try to offer very lower HSA plans. When I say very low I am talking probably as low as $50 a month along side a HSA with a small deductable. Many younger people will probably opt for a plan like that instead of the governments plan.

You still didn't answer my question as to who will administer this national plan.

I do not really understand your question... The insurance company will administer it. If you choose the some plans member of congress then it will be that insurance carrier if you choose a public plan such as medicare than it will be medicare who will administer it.
The government is just opening this up and will give tax credits (or basically the same as how the company you work for matches premiums in their group plans).

My question is why do you think lobbyists and such are trying to use scare tactics so it doesn't go through. Make no mistake about it, the insurance companies WILL get back what they lose in lowering premiums for competition AND the government will make sure they do. They just like to make it look like they are doing good for the people and hurting the insurance companies. You really do not know how the system works - spend some time in it - I guaranty you'll see it in a new light.

At first, they are not going to want it to go through because of the regulations they will now have to follow such as not denying converage due to a pre-existing condition or try to deny coverage as you get older, etc. This will hurt their profits at first because everyone that is not being covered due to a pre-existing condition will now get coverage. This will eventually work this out as they gain more customers. But again will definitely lower their profits at first and they are afraid of that.

Do you know this for fact?

I think bottom line is everyone needs to become more educated on the UHC. There are plenty more people here who would benefit from UHC there the flip of it. You are not being forced to do away with your own insurance. If it isn't going to take away from your insurance then why are we in an uproar? Our taxes are up anyway and they are going to go up whether we have UHC or not. If they are going to go up then at least let the "middle class" of this country benefit from it.

Thanks for the info Rod!

Not Republicans in general, but definitely him and all those around him.

I think what we should do is do away with medicaid and use that money for insuring only the children, severely disabled and elderly of our country. There are WAY too many out there that suck up all the money so they can sit on their lazy butts and spit out child after child. Those need to be cut-off and then there will be money for the children.
I've worked doing weatherization on low-income housing. Half, yes, half of the participants were 28-38 year olds whose only "disability" was a bum knee or some other equivalent ailment and they were showered with moneys coming directly from my paycheck. All the while they sat there watching satellite tv, talking on cell phones and ignoring their multiple kids running around. Just sickening....
That money could be used to insure those they NEED it, not just those that want it.
I don't think this proposed UHC is the answer.

I worked for the largest health insurance company in Louisville, a Fortune 200 company I might add and they are doing JUST that....running around talking about how horrible it is etc etc etc....yeah because they don't wanna lower their premiums. I worked the insurance company and our cheapest plan for a single person with no spouse no kids was like $141 every paycheck and it covered diddly squat, the deductible was $4000 and there was co-insurance, max pay-outs etc....absolutely ridiculous!

I worked for the largest health insurance company in Louisville, a Fortune 200 company I might add and they are doing JUST that....running around talking about how horrible it is etc etc etc....yeah because they don't wanna lower their premiums. I worked the insurance company and our cheapest plan for a single person with no spouse no kids was like $141 every paycheck and it covered diddly squat, the deductible was $4000 and there was co-insurance, max pay-outs etc....absolutely ridiculous!

Can you PM the company you worked for? I'm just curious if I know the lobbyist for that company.

Not Republicans in general, but definitely him and all those around him.

Yeah Bush sucks majorly sorry I had to say it. I'm sorry. I am done now.

I worked for the largest health insurance company in Louisville, a Fortune 200 company I might add and they are doing JUST that....running around talking about how horrible it is etc etc etc....yeah because they don't wanna lower their premiums. I worked the insurance company and our cheapest plan for a single person with no spouse no kids was like $141 every paycheck and it covered diddly squat, the deductible was $4000 and there was co-insurance, max pay-outs etc....absolutely ridiculous!

Can you PM the company you worked for? I'm just curious if I know the lobbyist for that company.

Done.

Well, I don't think UFC is the answer. I don't have all the answers. But I know I am not a stupid person. I feel like when people don't agree alot of people answer and reply in a tone that is to be read as they are being talked down too. No one is better than me for any reason. But I feel like people make assumptions on your knowledge, lifestyle, etc when we don't agree on this one issue. This is another political debate. I am actually a Democrat but not happy with this plan.

I am not a person who has no empathy. I was raised by a single father who worked hard to raise a daughter in the seventies, in a time when that wasn't normal. We didn't get any help b/c most of the programs were geared toward single moms. So, I know what it's like to do without health insurance and other things. When I say that I don't want to pay for other people's health care it isnt' b/c I am heartless and mean. It's b/c I don't think you can prove to me that people can't do for themselves. I don't mean children, I don't mean eldery. I mean people who are my age, but it's easier to stay at home than work. I just don't believe that the money wouldn't from my taxes. I don't think it would be any different than having everyone in the US on medicaid?

How can that not be the answer when the UHC plan will make it mandatory they buy some form of insurance or pay fines? Of course how they are going to inforce the fines is something to be seen, but I assume unfortuantly it will be similar to traffic tickets if you do not pay enough of them you could get arrested.

I think you mainly mean people that are on welfare who are lazy and just living off of it. I agree with you there. But unfortuantly the real truth is if you take welfare away from them it will increase crime, etc. A very sad issue, but unfortuantly true. I think a limited time needs to be enforced. I know technically there is a law on the books but I do not think it is truely enforced and it is so easy to get disability. I could even get disability probably for the problems I have with my headaches and my feet. But of course I have more honor in myself and choose to work.

I do not understand, why do you keep saying your going to pay for other people's healthcare. Your not going to do that your going to pay for your own health care. And for you, nothing will change because you are quite happy with the insurance company and group plan you are on. The only slight change is you may have to wait longer for appointments because more people will finally have healthcare... thats all.

Don't take this as an insult because it definitely is not mean't to be but I kinda feel like a broke record here. The UHC plan is simply just opening up a group plan for everyone that members of congress already benefit from. You will have a choice to join this new group plan or keep your existing plan. This is the only way for millions of people (like myself) to get on a group plan and save quite a bit just like you do on your company's plan. This is not like the UHC plan that Canada has for example, which I still like btw. This is quite frankly much better because you have the choice.

Rod, you can still have a choice here. You're covered on the national halth plan for FREE ANYWAYS... but you can have a private insurance plan. You don't HAVE to have the provincial coverage... you can choose not to use it... you just PAY when you don't use it. Just like you guys. We have to pay if we don't have our health card with us...and it's not cheap. If you have private insurance, you still ahve to pay... and then the insurance will reimburse you. Canadians are accountable for their medical bills.

doctors are paid by "the government" here...they submit their claims to the Ministry of Health. So whether you have national coverage, private coverage, whatever coverage you want, you still have to wait your turn. Cost of procedures etc is the same province wide, because it's mandated provincially through the federal program.

it really doesn't matter, all this broken record fighting...it will never go through. Thsoe of you who pay out the nose for coverage will keep doing so... and those who can't pay for it will go to the doctor's, go to the hospital anyways, make hundreds of thousands of dollars worth of bills, and pay like 10$ a month. No wonder there's no budget for this stuff, and the cost of stuff like tylenol is so high... peopl pay pennies on the dollar, because they can... and will continue to do so...because they're allowed to do so.. if people who have medical bills actually paid their medical bills instead of letting them keep piling up and only pay a few dollars each month.. NO KIDDING the costs stay so high. If Americans were slightly more forced to be accountable for their bills, perhaps the costs would go down....?

What-ever. Glad it ya'll and not me.

Um, they aren't controlling us? How are they going to offer this plan if they aren't going to tax me PLUS I then have the privelege of still paying my own premiums for my regular insurance?????

How is our premiums going to go down??? If more people go with the government program and not with private insurance companies that means less business for insurance, which means higher premiums.

Just like care insurance... more competition will bring premiums down. If people can go on the government plan at this rate, we best give some incentive to keep them on our plan - which means obviously lower rates. Trust me you think insurance companys do not have huge profits?

The next president can force drug companies & medical facilities & insurance companies to lower their costs without going to UHC.

They are going to tax people at a much higher rate to cover 100% UHC. And I pay enough tax. Thanks, but I prefer to keep my money to support my kids...I dont want to have to pay to support healthcare for the MILLIONS of people who will drop their healthcare in favor of free healthcare just because its free & "Why not?"

If they really wanted a solution, they could do something like regulate the costs of healthcare, and then make a program for people who arent offered insurance/cant afford insurance from work that works on a sliding scale instead of making it 100% free. So then people are still picking up a part of their own healthcare (everyone should be responsible for themselves in life in general, and not rely on everyone else to take care of them, this situation is no different) but part of its getting subsidized...so people will be doing their part, the govt isnt picking up 100%, everyone is happy.

I know in my state, they have a program where they pay for the premiums of health insurance and then cover the rest. So lets say insurance costs you $250 a month. The state pays you $250 a month & you get insurance from your job. Then your insurance picks up 80% (or 70% or whatever) of any bills and they pay the rest. There is a test to see if its more cost effective to pay your premiums or not, but generally it IS more cost effective. They might be paying the $250 a month, but when you get, say $500 in medical bills one month (not unusual if you are taking in a couple of kids for well checks & vaccines, or for a ER visit, etc)....your insurance pays $400 and the state is only picking up $100. Plus the $250 they paid you, and thats just $350. Its STILL cheaper for them to do this than pay 100% for medical care.

See? There could be LOTS of different options to fix this situation and UHC doesnt have to be one of them.

I want to see BIG TIME reform in the system, but I DO NOT want to see UHC. I dont want MY taxes raise to pay for other people- thats why I pay taxes already.

Rod, you can still have a choice here. You're covered on the national halth plan for FREE ANYWAYS... but you can have a private insurance plan. You don't HAVE to have the provincial coverage... you can choose not to use it... you just PAY when you don't use it. Just like you guys. We have to pay if we don't have our health card with us...and it's not cheap. If you have private insurance, you still ahve to pay... and then the insurance will reimburse you. Canadians are accountable for their medical bills.

doctors are paid by "the government" here...they submit their claims to the Ministry of Health. So whether you have national coverage, private coverage, whatever coverage you want, you still have to wait your turn. Cost of procedures etc is the same province wide, because it's mandated provincially through the federal program.

it really doesn't matter, all this broken record fighting...it will never go through. Thsoe of you who pay out the nose for coverage will keep doing so... and those who can't pay for it will go to the doctor's, go to the hospital anyways, make hundreds of thousands of dollars worth of bills, and pay like 10$ a month. No wonder there's no budget for this stuff, and the cost of stuff like tylenol is so high... peopl pay pennies on the dollar, because they can... and will continue to do so...because they're allowed to do so.. if people who have medical bills actually paid their medical bills instead of letting them keep piling up and only pay a few dollars each month.. NO KIDDING the costs stay so high. If Americans were slightly more forced to be accountable for their bills, perhaps the costs would go down....?

What-ever. Glad it ya'll and not me.

Probably not a good idea to lump all Americans into a "you guys dont pay your medical bills" category. We've never had any collections for medical bills or bills we had for years & years paying $10 a month on.

I'm happy to receive medical care when I want it, how I want it, and I'm happy to pay my bills.

As you can imagine, we have quite a few bills from DH's illness now, and thats OK. I was able to go within HOURS to have him checked out when we first heard something was wrong (not days, not weeks....) and within days for everything else. Now, sure, the bills are expensive...but I'm not still waiting around for DH to get some tests that are taking forever b/c everyone else has to have them too & the waiting list is long, wondering if something is going to happen to him in the meantime...and I'll happily pay those bills, and more than $10 at a time, too.

Crystal, what program is this?

You are mistaking public assistance/cash assistance with for Medicaid. It is fairly difficult to get medicaid unless you are a child, pregnant or disabled and below the poverty level. A single man who is low income will usually not qualify. In most low income families, only the children (and the mother for a certain amount of time) are covered.

I think your overall statement was harsh. I have worked in this field for 15 years and in my experience, it is not as cut and dry as that. I would love to talk at length about the cycle of welfare but I suppose that is a little off topic It is one of the few things that I am passionate about when it is brought up on this board--that's why I had to mention something here. There are always going to be bad apples who abuse the system, there are people who commit white collar crimes and drive up the costs of many things, there are people who commit insurance fraud and drive up those prices. It is not only the poor who cause our society to pay more money, it is actually less often them but they are the easier scapegoat.

I am still researching (thanks for the links TLC) UHC but I am certainly in favor (as you are) of revamping Medicaid and the UHC government program is just that--a revamping of the system. I would like to see a little more about the funding-- Is there some funding given to the government insurance program so that they can cover all the extra people who cannot pay full premiums? How will that work exactly.

If they want this passed. We need to see some specifics and I imagine when the time comes, we will.