Page 187 of 214 [ 3415 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 184, 185, 186, 187, 188, 189, 190 ... 214  Next

kraftiekortie
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 4 Feb 2014
Gender: Male
Posts: 87,510
Location: Queens, NYC

13 Nov 2017, 6:01 am

2K a month, without taxes taken out (gross) is a very low salary

In 2018, a gross salary of 1,900 a month (for a family of 2) makes you eligible for Medicaid in most places. Being eligible for Medicaid means you really are not middle class.

You can't live in your car in New York City, for all intents and purposes.

We should have a European-style healthcare system. It's about time we joined the ranks of the civilized.



LoveNotHate
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 Oct 2013
Gender: Female
Posts: 6,195
Location: USA

13 Nov 2017, 6:07 am

RetroGamer87 wrote:
So who's fault is this and why didn't they opt for a European style healthcare system?

Were they able to change employers and keep their coverage under the old system?

Forgive me for asking so many questions but I don't live in America.

President Obama went on tv and said we couldn't afford it.

He said our government run health care is a "ticking time bomb", and thus, it would be foolish to expand it.

Obama: Health Care a 'ticking time bomb'
http://www.nbcnews.com/id/31366944/ns/p ... time-bomb/



RetroGamer87
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 30 Jul 2013
Age: 36
Gender: Male
Posts: 10,970
Location: Adelaide, Australia

13 Nov 2017, 6:32 am

EzraS wrote:
No. The old system for the working class was obliterated across the board
No, what I meant was were the able to change employers while suffering from a pre-existing condition without loss of coverage during the existence of the old system. I didn't mean were they able to retain it after it's obliteration.

LoveNotHate wrote:
RetroGamer87 wrote:
So who's fault is this and why didn't they opt for a European style healthcare system?
President Obama went on tv and said we couldn't afford it.
Australia is able to afford it and we have much less money than America.


_________________
The days are long, but the years are short


kraftiekortie
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 4 Feb 2014
Gender: Male
Posts: 87,510
Location: Queens, NYC

13 Nov 2017, 6:36 am

Australia has about 1/10th the population of the US.

Still....we should join the ranks of the civilized. Enough of this "socialist" paranoia.



RetroGamer87
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 30 Jul 2013
Age: 36
Gender: Male
Posts: 10,970
Location: Adelaide, Australia

13 Nov 2017, 6:51 am

Yes, but you have a higher GDP per capita. That means you have more money per person.


_________________
The days are long, but the years are short


kraftiekortie
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 4 Feb 2014
Gender: Male
Posts: 87,510
Location: Queens, NYC

13 Nov 2017, 6:55 am

We have more of a disparity between rich and poor, too. We have way more millionaires and billionaires. And way more poor people, too.

But all this doesn't matter. I agree with you about the need for national health care.



cathylynn
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 24 Aug 2011
Gender: Female
Posts: 13,045
Location: northeast US

13 Nov 2017, 10:58 am

LoveNotHate wrote:
RetroGamer87 wrote:
So who's fault is this and why didn't they opt for a European style healthcare system?

Were they able to change employers and keep their coverage under the old system?

Forgive me for asking so many questions but I don't live in America.

President Obama went on tv and said we couldn't afford it.

He said our government run health care is a "ticking time bomb", and thus, it would be foolish to expand it.

Obama: Health Care a 'ticking time bomb'
http://www.nbcnews.com/id/31366944/ns/p ... time-bomb/


that's not what he said. he said escalating health care costs, in general, are a ticking time bomb. https://www.politico.com/blogs/ben-smit ... yer-019106



cathylynn
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 24 Aug 2011
Gender: Female
Posts: 13,045
Location: northeast US

13 Nov 2017, 11:20 am

the ONLY reason we don't have the more efficient single-payer is that insurance companies make huge campaign donations to lawmakers.



LoveNotHate
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 Oct 2013
Gender: Female
Posts: 6,195
Location: USA

13 Nov 2017, 11:37 am

cathylynn wrote:
LoveNotHate wrote:
RetroGamer87 wrote:
So who's fault is this and why didn't they opt for a European style healthcare system?

Were they able to change employers and keep their coverage under the old system?

Forgive me for asking so many questions but I don't live in America.

President Obama went on tv and said we couldn't afford it.

He said our government run health care is a "ticking time bomb", and thus, it would be foolish to expand it.

Obama: Health Care a 'ticking time bomb'
http://www.nbcnews.com/id/31366944/ns/p ... time-bomb/


that's not what he said. he said escalating health care costs, in general, are a ticking time bomb. https://www.politico.com/blogs/ben-smit ... yer-019106


He said: "It's a ticking time bomb for the federal budget. ", so he was speaking about gov. run health care.

He was saying the gov. can't control costs, so single-payer won't work.



LoveNotHate
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 Oct 2013
Gender: Female
Posts: 6,195
Location: USA

13 Nov 2017, 11:51 am

cathylynn wrote:
the ONLY reason we don't have the more efficient single-payer is that insurance companies make huge campaign donations to lawmakers.

Most Americans get mostly free/low cost health care now.

Medicaid/Medicare/Obamacare subsidies/"Cadillac" union healthcare, state/federal retiree "gold plated" health care, Fortune 100 company "gold plated" health care ....

From what I see, it's the working class people, working for Tier III+ employers that are the only ones stuggling with it.



EzraS
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 24 Sep 2013
Gender: Male
Posts: 27,828
Location: Twin Peaks

13 Nov 2017, 12:08 pm

LoveNotHate wrote:
cathylynn wrote:
the ONLY reason we don't have the more efficient single-payer is that insurance companies make huge campaign donations to lawmakers.

Most Americans get mostly free/low cost health care now.

Medicaid/Medicare/Obamacare subsidies/"Cadillac" union healthcare, state/federal retiree "gold plated" health care, Fortune 100 company "gold plated" health care ....

From what I see, it's the working class people, working for Tier III+ employers that are the only ones stuggling with it.


What is a tier 3 salary and do you know the number or percentage of people who are T3?



LoveNotHate
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 Oct 2013
Gender: Female
Posts: 6,195
Location: USA

13 Nov 2017, 12:34 pm

EzraS wrote:
LoveNotHate wrote:
cathylynn wrote:
the ONLY reason we don't have the more efficient single-payer is that insurance companies make huge campaign donations to lawmakers.

Most Americans get mostly free/low cost health care now.

Medicaid/Medicare/Obamacare subsidies/"Cadillac" union healthcare, state/federal retiree "gold plated" health care, Fortune 100 company "gold plated" health care ....

From what I see, it's the working class people, working for Tier III+ employers that are the only ones stuggling with it.


What is a tier 3 salary and do you know the number or percentage of people who are T3?

It's not about "salary"; it's these smaller companies that can't bargain for cheaper health plans, and can't afford more expensive ones.

They face the full brunt of price increases, and they respond by providing cheaper or no plan at all.

My mom works for such a place, they offered "family health insurance" (covering children too) for a $1000/month premium, which is impossible for bus drivers who make, maybe $25,000-$30,0000 / yr to pay $12,000 /yr towards health care premiums.

I don't know how many people that is, but I think it's growing.



cathylynn
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 24 Aug 2011
Gender: Female
Posts: 13,045
Location: northeast US

13 Nov 2017, 12:40 pm

LoveNotHate wrote:
cathylynn wrote:
LoveNotHate wrote:
RetroGamer87 wrote:
So who's fault is this and why didn't they opt for a European style healthcare system?

Were they able to change employers and keep their coverage under the old system?

Forgive me for asking so many questions but I don't live in America.

President Obama went on tv and said we couldn't afford it.

He said our government run health care is a "ticking time bomb", and thus, it would be foolish to expand it.

Obama: Health Care a 'ticking time bomb'
http://www.nbcnews.com/id/31366944/ns/p ... time-bomb/


that's not what he said. he said escalating health care costs, in general, are a ticking time bomb. https://www.politico.com/blogs/ben-smit ... yer-019106


He said: "It's a ticking time bomb for the federal budget. ", so he was speaking about gov. run health care.

He was saying the gov. can't control costs, so single-payer won't work.


it WASN'T an argument against single payer. it was a call to rein in overall health care costs to not bankrupt existing programs. he goes on to say that increasing costs would lower the living standard of privately-insured citizens, too. you tend to read things in an idiosyncratic way. i'm referencing your folk-lore definition of mental illness and you thinking your definition is better than that of doctors. it's hard to reason with an unreasonable person.



Darmok
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 18 Dec 2015
Gender: Male
Posts: 12,030
Location: New England

13 Nov 2017, 12:48 pm

LoveNotHate wrote:
It's not about "salary"; it's these smaller companies that can't bargain for cheaper health plans, and can't afford more expensive ones.

This is the classic result of leftist "progressive" policies. The left rants and raves against "big corporations" and then enacts policies that favor big corporations and drive small mom-and-pop companies out of business.


_________________
 
There Are Four Lights!


cathylynn
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 24 Aug 2011
Gender: Female
Posts: 13,045
Location: northeast US

13 Nov 2017, 12:55 pm

Darmok wrote:
LoveNotHate wrote:
It's not about "salary"; it's these smaller companies that can't bargain for cheaper health plans, and can't afford more expensive ones.

This is the classic result of leftist "progressive" policies. The left rants and raves against "big corporations" and then enacts policies that favor big corporations and drive small mom-and-pop companies out of business.


how is having fewer employees, therefore needing fewer policies, thus having less financial pull on insurance companies ANYTHING to do with government positions, left or right. it's your revered free market.



Darmok
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 18 Dec 2015
Gender: Male
Posts: 12,030
Location: New England

13 Nov 2017, 4:43 pm

And just think, this was almost what dinner at the White House would have been:

Image


_________________
 
There Are Four Lights!