From: Lloyd Parsons on 25 Mar 2010 12:52
mark <markstenroos(a)yahoo.com> wrote:
> On Mar 24, 2:29�pm, Andrew Rose <and...(a)pristineaudio.com> wrote:
> > On 24/03/2010 20:56, Trojan Cover wrote:
> > > You now legally have to have insurance, which means you have to
> > > pay insurance companies your hard earned money, and if you don't
> > > then it's against the law. The government forcing you to pay
> > > large corporations isn't very liberal!
> > The answer is a state healthcare system paid for out of taxes - but for
> > some reason the US seems reluctant to embrace what a vast number of
> > other countries see as the obvious best solution.
> Actually, the way the new HCR works will be something like that. The
> US government will make an adjustment to the tax code to charge every
> American a higher tax rate to account for health insurance costs. When
> it comes time to file your taxes, you will be given a deduction for
> having health insurance. You'll have to provide paperwork or some
> other documentation to prove that you have health insurance. Once you
> do that, you will be eligible for a tax deduction of up to $2500 for a
> family of four. If you don't have health insurance, you won't get the
> deduction, ergo, you will end up paying something into the system.
> People who don't opt for health insurance won't even notice that
> they've been taxed for not getting health insurance. It's along the
> lines of homeowners being able to take a deduction for mortgage
> interest while renters are not privy to the deduction.
I wonder how that will work for those of us that are on Medicare and
TriCare for Life. Will we get to take a deduction (or will it be a tax
credit) for most/all of our Medicare premium?
From: Bob Lombard on 25 Mar 2010 13:46
Lloyd Parsons wrote:
> At my age, why would I actually give a damn what 'brand' others might
> put on me? Frankly I never actually gave a damn before, and see no
> reason to start now! :)
> Medicare is not welfare, btw. The gov't took money from me and my
> employers over the years to make me pay for it, and still gets a monthly
> payment from me for it.
After the first generation (Ms. Ida Fuller, who lived up the street
from me, was issued the first Social Security card, or was the first
to draw pension from SocSec, don't remember which), it didn't really
work that way. You pay in to help support current recipients, and hope
the next generation does the same for you. What they take back for
Medicare coverage is less than medical expenses, which is what the
Medicare 'allowed payment' to providers is sort of about.
Music, books, a few movies
From: EG on 25 Mar 2010 17:39
On Mar 24, 6:00 pm, Roland van Gaalen <SeeSignat...(a)DeadSpam.com>
> One apendectomy costs $ P
> Expected number of apendectomies in the whole country = A
> Insured population is = N
> Premium to insure apendectomies = $ A times P divided by N
> Add a small percentage to cover administrative cost
> That's more or less how a single-payer works
> Question for the right-wingers:
> Why are private insurers more efficient in doing this arithmetic?
> Roland van Gaalen
In a way, you have answered your own question:
the actual math is not as simple as you describe it.
Insurance business is significantly more complicated.
Then again, a question for you:
why is it that almost any organization is run more efficiently
by private owners instead of government?
It doesn't really matter what the organization does.
If you are looking for answers: look at Greece, Spain, etc.
Look around you and you will see Europe heading from the
economic backwaters towards an economic decline.
20 years after the collapse of Soviet Union we are now
witnessing the collapse of european style socialism.
The irony is that not only Europe, but much of the US does
not understand what is happening... hence the US health reform.
From: David on 25 Mar 2010 20:55
Same with Australia. Modern, best healthcare system in the world, with
the taxes which go to pay for it...
I recently went in for a suspected appendicitis. Admitted to hospital
via free ambulance, got my own private suite that over looked the bay
where I live. Stayed three days. All tests free. Meals free. Even got
cable TV in the room for free. When I was discharged, all I did was
sign a form. NO COST.
I pay minimal tax during the year. My prescriptions are heavily
discounted. After spending $1000 dollars on prescriptions in a year -
they are free for the rest of the year. A visit to my GP - free. Blood
tests, x-rays, CT scans - free. Ambulance free.
I can't understand how America seems reluctant to help those who are
underprivileged with free healthcare. But then, after what we saw with
what happened in New Orleans - what can I say....
On Mar 25, 7:29 am, Andrew Rose <and...(a)pristineaudio.com> wrote:
> On 24/03/2010 20:56, Trojan Cover wrote:
> > You now legally have to have insurance, which means you have to
> > pay insurance companies your hard earned money, and if you don't
> > then it's against the law. The government forcing you to pay
> > large corporations isn't very liberal!
> The answer is a state healthcare system paid for out of taxes - but for
> some reason the US seems reluctant to embrace what a vast number of
> other countries see as the obvious best solution.
> Emigrate to France - best healthcare system in the world, with the taxes
> which go to pay for it...
> Andrew Rose
> Pristine Classical: "The destination for people interested in historic
> recordings..." (Gramophone)
From: Howard Brazee on 25 Mar 2010 21:15
On Thu, 25 Mar 2010 14:39:35 -0700 (PDT), EG <edopenu(a)gmail.com>
>20 years after the collapse of Soviet Union we are now
>witnessing the collapse of european style socialism.
>The irony is that not only Europe, but much of the US does
>not understand what is happening... hence the US health reform.
Of course our health care reform is very close to what Nixon proposed,
our taxing the rich considerably less than what Nixon had. Old
Liberal ideas seem to have died.
They can rest in peace right next to the old Republican ideas of
fiscal responsibility, and against governing from the courts.
"In no part of the constitution is more wisdom to be found,
than in the clause which confides the question of war or peace
to the legislature, and not to the executive department."
- James Madison