Re: Universal Health Care Plans: TWO WORDS

[rateyes]

Single Payer.







If it's not a "single payer" plan, it's not universal health CARE. Universal health INSURANCE is NOT universal health CARE.



Always remember and never forget:



SINGLE.PAYER.


Got that, Democratic candidates?

[K Gardner]

1. Thank you. Sweet and simple. :-)

[rateyes]

2. My pleasure.

:hi:

[cuke]

3. Two words - You're wrong

Medicare for all, is insurance for all. Medicare does not provide any health CARE. Just like insurance, it pays for medical care. Just like insurance, it doesn't pay if the service isn't covered. Just like insurance, you have to pay a premium.

[YOY]

4. but unlike insurance there's no middleman trying to maximize profits

n/t

[cuke]

7. Straw man distraction from the OP's illogical mistake

Medicare is an INSURANCE program. It does NOT provide any health CARE

[YOY]

9. Just out of curiousity and with all respect, why are you so hard-up to defend medical insurance?

Really, I'm curious.

[Name removed]

12. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

15. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[cuke]

22. Yours was not a polite question

I don't know why you think accusing me of being "so hard-up to defend medical insurance" is polite.

It's not, no matter how many times you say "with all respect".

[Name removed]

17. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[inthebrain]

13. Hospitals, community clinics, primary care Drs provide healthcare

I don't get your beef here but nobody is saying that Insurance or Medicare actually does the physical care. Medicare covers a bunch of procedures but unlike private insurance will not turn you down because it harms their profit marjin.

[cuke]

18. You are wrong

People most definitely are claiming that only DK's plan is a health CARE plan, when the truth is, it provides no health CARE, just insurance. Just like the other plans.

And medicare turns down claims all the time. I've had it done to my mom on many occassions. It's happening right now. Medicare won't pay for my mother's care because they say it's not "medically necessary".

She's 76yo with dementia. She can't dress, eat, bathe or go to the bathroom without assistance. She is in danger of falling down at any second. She requires care 24/7 to stay alive but Medicare won't pay for it because it's too expensive and it's not medically necessary.

Instead of refusing claims to make money, Medicare refuses claims to save money. In the end, I'm screwed either way, so what difference does it make WHY they don't cover something, so long as they don't cover it? I'm just as screwed either way

[inthebrain]

23. Specifically what exactly is "it"

Does she need hospice care?

I haven't looked at medicare or it's coverage in years. Overall it's pretty staunch on income guidelines and some pallative measures. You're not exactly pointing out what the "it" is that you are responding to. She sounds like she needs help with ADLs.

[cuke]

28. Home care from a trained professional

Medicare won't pay for it because it would be too expensive for Medicare to cover long-term care. Protecting profits is not the only reason people are denied coverage for certain services.

And I think you're confusing Medicare with Medicaid. Medicaid has strict income guidelines. Medicare is available to every single american over 65.

And yes, she needs help with ADL's and help to keep her from killing herself.

Clinton's plan has a long-term care component

[inthebrain]

37. I think you need to look at the documentation

Medicare will cover home health aids in instances where the client is homebound. There needs to be proof in the documentation that this is the case.

http://64.233.169.104/search?q=cache:crAl6x3thqcJ:www.cahabagba.com/part_a/education_and_outreach/educational_materials/hh_coverage.pdf+Medicare+coverage+guidelines&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=3&gl=us#27

[cuke]

41. Wrong. I have had a lawyer look into

An Elder Law atty who specializes in Medicare. I worked with this man for 12 years, and even Medicare people consult with him about what the law says.

My mother can walk. She isn't "homebound" even though she couldn't go very far.

Like I said, profit isn't the only reason for limiting coverage.

[inthebrain]

76. If she isn't homebound you aren't going to get coverage

It has nothing to do with "Medicare refusing to pay because she will bankrupt the system". I have no idea what attorney you're using but there are specific guidelines here. I'm not defending them or anything but it sounds like there is something wrong with your attorney overlooking the case. Either that or there is more to this story that your not letting on to.

The link I gave you tells you what the guidelines are.

[cuke]

80. That's what I just said

'It has nothing to do with "Medicare refusing to pay because she will bankrupt the system". '

Yes it does. Medicare does not cover LTC for the none-homebound because it is too expensive to do so.

"not defending them or anything but it sounds like there is something wrong with your attorney overlooking the case"

I don't know why you would say that when we all seem to agree that medicare won't cover my mom because she is not "home bound". I have the lawyer to fight with the LTC provider who won't pay for her LTC. I apologize for not being clear about that.

[rateyes]

27. Thanks for making my fucking argument for me....

Get this through your head: MANDATED INSURANCE WILL NOT HELP ANYONE IN YOUR MOTHER'S SITUATION.
ONLY SINGLE PAYER WILL DO THAT!!

Why the HELL do you post assuming that I am campaigning for one candidate over another? I didn't say a damned word about DK or Hillary or anybody else. I posted about HEALTH CARE, and made the point that mandated insurance will not provide universal care.

Get your head out of Hillary's butt and actually address what was posted, rather than building up a "straw-man" to attack in order to, feebly, trying to prop up your candidate. Not every post at DU is about Hillary.

AAAAARRRRRRRGGGGGGHHHHHHHHHHH! :banghead:

[cuke]

30. Again, you are 100% WRONG

Clinton's plan includes coverage for long term care.

DK's plan does NOTHING for my mom. Single payer does NOTHING for my mom.

And DK's plans IS mandated insurance.

[rateyes]

34. Aaarrgggh.

Who the hell in our conversation said a damned word in defense of DK's plan?

Again, LISTEN UP. I am NOT defending any democratic candidates health "care" plan, because none of them are universal health "care."

Why do you keep throwing DK's plan into the conversation?

Quit campaigning for a few minutes to talk about the ISSUE.

[cuke]

44. Again, DK's plan is single payer

I am not saying you are a supporter of that plan.. I am merely using it to show you how single payer is not the answer to every problem.

The issue is single payer, and your claim that it is the ONLY universal plan. It's in your OP and you are wrong about that.

[Lydia Leftcoast]

61. Cuke, even nowadays, long-term care insurance is SEPARATE from medical

insurance. Even with today's privatized system.

If you have Blue Cross or whatever other private insurer you might use, its normal health insurance policies do not cover nursing home stays or in-home care beyond 30 days, same as Medicare.

[cuke]

65. True

My mom has LTC insurance. I'm fighting them to pay for it

Clinton's plan includes LTC coverage.

[cuke]

75. And to further clarify

I brought up LTC issues to show that single payer is not health CARE. Just like any other INSURANCE plan, if it's not covered, they won't pay.

You can still get LTC. You just have to pay for it, becuase the supposedly universal SINGLE PAYER (Medicare is a SP plan) health CARE plan does not always supply the care. That's because single payer is NOT a health CARE plan. It's merely an insurance method of paying for the care.

[rateyes]

64. Again, cut and paste where I said single payer was the only

"universal plan." Tick, tock.

[cuke]

70. If it's not a "single payer" plan, it's not universal health CARE

There you go, right from your OP

[rateyes]

77. I knew you would paste that sentence...

and, it does NOT say what you claim it says. Read your claim. Read my sentence. They do not match up.

[cuke]

81. Switzerland has a universal plan that is not single payer

It depends on individual mandates. You know, the things you say can't be universal

[rateyes]

85. Again, show me where I said insurance can't be "universal"

or even universally mandated? I never made such a claim.

I said that universally mandated INSURANCE does not equal universal CARE.

You equate universal "coverage" with universal "care." They are NOT equal. Get it?

[cuke]

87. Asked and answered

Now you're just denying the obvious meaning of your own words

"You equate universal "coverage" with universal "care." They are NOT equal. Get it?"

No, everyone having insurance has always been called "universal health care". You're the one who is trying to redefine the language.

[rateyes]

89. I'm not trying to redefine the language...

I'm trying to RECLAIM the original definition of the language. Those who equate "insurance" with "care" are the ones who have done the redefining.

[cuke]

91. Yes you are

No one has ever made a distinction between "universal health care" and "universal health insurance" until this year.

And insurance does provide care by paying for it. That's how it works in a for-profit system. The only way to remove profit is by making health care workers govt employees, and that is never going to happen

[rateyes]

94. Bull.

Your first assertion about "distinctions" is pure horse hockey. And, I didn't say insurance doesn't provide care. I said it doesn't provide UNIVERSAL care. It does NOT pay for EVERYTHING for EVERYBODY.

[cuke]

95. Universal health insurance provides universal health care

That's a simple fact of life in the US today.

And NOTHING pays for EVERYTHING for EVERYBODY. Another straw man

[rateyes]

98. No, it doesn't.

[cuke]

100. It does in Switzerland

All you have is denial. No facts.

Now you want to deny the facts about Switzerlands health care plan

[rateyes]

102. Switzerland's health care plan mandates minimal coverage...

at exorbitant premium costs. It's like mandated car insurance. You get the minimum by law, and have a wreck where you total another person's Cadillac, and you're screwed.

You need a liver transplant? With the minimum insurance...you might be covered for a lot of things...but, you'll be dead, because you won't get the liver.

Oh, and your mother still doesn't get the LTC she needs in Switzerland with the minimum plan required by law.

[cuke]

105. So do the plans by dems

All of their plans mandates minimal coverage at least as good as Medicare. Some of the plans go even further and mandate coverage for things like mental health, reproductive health, preventative treatment and coverage for chronic diseases.

And Switzerland's premiums are affordable as proven by the fact that everyone in Switzerland can afford it.

"Oh, and your mother still doesn't get the LTC she needs in Switzerland with the minimum plan required by law."

Wrong again. In Switzerland, she would recieve LTC. and the plan by Clinton mandates coverage for long term care.

Is there any fact you can't get wrong?

[rateyes]

101. No, it doesn't.

If it doesn't pay for every medically necessary treatment for everybody, it's not universal.

[cuke]

107. Wrong again

In the US, all major medical plans must cover "medically necessary" procedures.

Is there any fact you can't get wrong?

[fed-up]

35. in home care is almost never covered by medical (or medicare) insurance-what you

are talking about is long-term care

Have you tried contacting in home supportive services?

My mom had Kaiser and Medicare and in home care was NOT covered after her stroke.

My sister with MS finally got approved for In Home Supportive Services after I helped her fill out the form, then she moved out of the country.

[cuke]

62. Not entirely true

Medicare rarely covers it, but many insurers do. My mom has Long-Term Care insurance and we're fighting with them to pay for the home care. I think we'll win, but until then we have to pay out of pocket, and it's not cheap

[Hieronymus]

119. France has it ..

[mikelgb]

63. that is why another part of DK's plan is expanding coverage

especially for mental illnesses

but also for dental and other under-covered procedures

[cuke]

71. Good for him. Seriously

But I still prefer Clinton's plan. She expands coverage further than DK does, and she does more to reduce the costs of health care. She also has a long term care coverage

[rateyes]

16. Cuke....look at my OP and show me ONE DAMNED PLACE

I used the word MEDICARE.

Using your own mantra against you: Why don't you try and DEFEND Hillarycare rather than just "attack?" I'll tell you why. You don't know what the hell you are talking about.

[cuke]

21. DK's plan is single payer

Your claim that single payer gets the insurance industry out of the health care system is just not true. Even under DK's plan, there will still be private insurers to provide supplemental coverage.

Why don't you just be clear about your position? Your problem is with "for profit" insurance, something even DK isn't proposing. Another problem is that this puts you in the position of opposing EVERY health care plan proposed by democrats. It also shows you put eliminating profits is a higher priority for you than covering the uninsured.

So much for the uninsured. Toss them under the bus

[BootinUp]

24. agreed

While I like the idea of a not for profit system, it is not politically feasible at this time.

[cuke]

29. And feasible or not, people shouldn't mislead and propogandize

on such an important issue just to score points for their favorite candidate

[rateyes]

36. You're right. People should not mislead and propogandize

on such an important issue just to score points for their favorite candidate. SO WHY THE HELL ARE YOU DOING IT?


Tell me, cuke. WHO IS MY FAVORITE CANDIDATE? (If you answer "Kucinich" you will be wrong.)

[cuke]

38. Everything I said is true

which is why you haven't been able to refute anything I've said.

Single payer is NOT necesarily universal.

[rateyes]

45. Who is my favorite candidate, cuke?

You are the only one trying to "score points" for any candidate in this conversation.

I still await your answer to my question.

[cuke]

49. Single payer is not health care. It's an insurance plan

And single payer is not universal.

I proved your OP wrong, and you can't defend yourself, so you're trying to make this about candidates

[rateyes]

58. You are the one who made it about candidates with your

post about "scoring points for one's favorite candidate."

Nice try at dodging the question, though.

Want to try again? Who is my favorite candidate?

[cuke]

72. Please defend you OP or admit you made a mistake

You said "If it's not a "single payer" plan, it's not universal health CARE"

That is not true.

[rateyes]

78. It is true.

And, you still haven't answered my question.

[cuke]

82. Switzerland has a universal plan that is not single payer

It depends on individual mandates.

But according to you, that's impossible

[rateyes]

92. According to me...

that's not impossible. What's not universal about the Swiss plan is health CARE. There are necessary treatments that are NOT covered by the insurance. And, the cost of the premiums are sky high.

[cuke]

96. Wrong again

You said if it not's single payer, then it's not universal health care. Switzerland's health care PLAN is not single payer, but it is a universal health CARE plan.

"What's not universal about the Swiss plan is health CARE. There are necessary treatments that are NOT covered by the insurance."

1) NO PLAN pays for everything. NONE. Not one anywhere in the world that I know of will pay for EVERYTHING.

2) All plans, BY LAW, must cover "medically necessary" procedures.

3) Premiums in Switzerland are affordable.

And universal has NEVER been about what services are covered and which are not, which is irrelevant because your flase claim that "medically necessary" services are not covered.

[rateyes]

104. Premiums in Switzerland are affordable?

I guess that depends on the income. $7500.00 a year for a family of four might be affordable to some, but not to all.

[cuke]

106. Yes, which is why EVERY SWISS CITIZEN has insurance

and they have a higher standard of living than we do

[rateyes]

109. Every Swiss citizen does NOT have insurance

because it's "affordable." They have it because it's MANDATED.

[rateyes]

111. See post 109

[cuke]

113. Still wrong on the facts

If they couldn't afford to pay for it, they wouldn't have insurance. Insurance companies don't make money providing coverage to people who can't pay the premiums. The Swiss can, and do, pay their premuims.

[cuke]

114. And $7500/yr for a family of four is a BARGAIN

Do you think health care is cheap? For a single person in the US, a decent plan will cost at least $800/month ($9600/yr). That's more than the Swiss pay for a family of four!!!

I would kill for insurance that cheap.

[eridani]

116. It's also the 2nd most expensive in the world because of that

The government does try to penalize private insurers for cherry-picking, though.

[rateyes]

31. You are full of it.

Show me where the hell I made a claim that single payer gets the insurance industry out of the health care system. You just make shit up as you go along. And, yes, it does put me in the position of opposing every candidates plan. Was I defending anybody? Did you not read the last sentence of my post?

And, your accusation about eliminating profits as a higher priority than "covering the uninsured" and me "throwing them under the bus" is just bullshit.

Again, get this through your thick skull: I am for universal health CARE. Underinsured people are considered "covered" under the plans that you are defending. But, saying they're covered doesn't make it so.

Talk about throwing people under the damned bus! That's exactly what mandated insurance will do.

[cuke]

39. You said that single payer was the only universal plan. You're wrong

Single payer means that there is only one payer. It does not mean "everyone is covered"

Try again, but this time see if you can avoid the childish namecalling and baseless accusations.

"Underinsured people are considered "covered" under the plans that you are defending. But, saying they're covered doesn't make it so."

The plans I am defending all provide coverage that it is at least as good as Medicare. The best plan, Clinton's, provide coverage far beyond what Medicare provides. The other candidates are afraid to lead on this issue, which is why even Kucinich is offering a plan with limited coverage

[K Gardner]

50. God, please EDUCATE yourself, this is embarassing. Read HR 676.

I don't want to confuse you with big words or lofty ideas, so I'll keep it simple. Everyone in. No one out. Every man, woman and child covered from cradle to grave.

On second thought, why bother. ::erasing rest of post:::

[cuke]

53. It's not about DK's plan, according to the OP

It's about the OP's claim that single payer is the ONLY universal plan.

That's not true

[rateyes]

52. You are the only one putting up straw man arguments.

And, you play the martyr so very well. The plans you are defending are not sustainable, And again, you keep trying to link my position with DK's. Why are you doing that? Oh, yeah. STRAW MAN.

[cuke]

56. You said that single payer was the only universal plan. You're wrong

It's right in your OP, and you are wrong about that. Why don't you just admit it?

And I never said you support DK. I've been using DK as an example because he is the only one offering a single payer plan

[rateyes]

60. Cut and paste from my OP where I said that single payer

is the only universal "plan."

I said that single payer is the only plan that will provide universal CARE, and that universal INSURANCE does not equal universal CARE.

If you're going to quote me, get it right.

[cuke]

67. "If it's not a "single payer" plan, it's not universal health CARE. "

That's a quote, and you're wrong.

If a plan covers everyone, it is universal, even if it's not single payer

[rateyes]

74. Please pay attention:

Health INSURANCE does not equal health CARE.

I didn't say that universal health INSURANCE wasn't a "universal PLAN." I didn't say that universal INSURANCE doesn't "cover" everyone. I said that universal INSURANCE will not provide universal CARE.

You said: "If a plan covers everyone, it is universal, even if it's not single payer." I agree. But, as I said before a plan that covers everyone (with universal insurance) will NOT provide universal CARE.

Quit getting hung up on the adjective "universal." Start paying attention to the NOUNS: INSURANCE vs. CARE.

Universal INSURANCE will NOT provide universal CARE.

Again, I did NOT say that single-payer is the only universal PLAN. I said that single payer is the only plan that will provide universal CARE.

Geeeez. How much more simple can I put it to make you understand it?

[cuke]

79. Please pay attention - Words do not mean what you say they mean

Proposals to provide insurance to the uninsured have ALWAYS been called "health CARE plans", not "health insurance plans". You're trying to redefine the phrase in order to score propoganda points, and the facts be damned

"I did NOT say that single-payer is the only universal PLAN. I said that single payer is the only plan that will provide universal CARE."

And you are WRONG. Switzerland has a non-single payer system that is UNIVERSAL. It has achieved universal coverage by using mandates.

[rateyes]

88. Proposals to provide insurance to the uninsured have

not ALWAYS been called health CARE plans. But, for the sake of argument, let me concede that point to you. And, then allow me to say this:

It is CLEAR from my post that I CONTRAST the word "INSURANCE" with the word "CARE." I went so far as to say the universal "INSURANCE" does not equal universal "CARE." Switzerland may very well have achieved universal "coverage." But, universal "coverage" does not equal universal "care."

I am NOT trying to "redefine the phrase in order to score propoganda points." Those who equate "insurance" with "care" are the ones who have redefined the words to make them mean something that they do not mean.

It is disingenuous to say "I have a universal health CARE plan" when that plan only provides universal health INSURANCE." They are NOT the same things. And, that's the point I was making, and you missed it because you are too busy trying to defend the argument that INSURANCE equals CARE.

And, you have to defend that position because YOUR favorite candidate disingenuously equates "health insurance coverage" with "health care."

ON EDIT: UNIVERSAL means "everybody"....I concede that Hillary's plan is UNIVERSAL...never said it wasn't. It's UNIVERSAL INSURANCE. But, it's still NOT "universal care."

[cuke]

90. Wrong again. They have ALWAYS been called "health care plans"

The Clinton's managed care plan was called "a universal health care plan"

"It is CLEAR from my post that I CONTRAST the word "INSURANCE" with the word "CARE." I went so far as to say the universal "INSURANCE" does not equal universal "CARE." Switzerland may very well have achieved universal "coverage." But, universal "coverage" does not equal universal "care.""

And you have no reason or justification to do so aside from a desire to knock the health CARE plans being proposed by dem candidates. And Switzerland has universal health CARE. Walk into a hospital and you will recieve health CARE.

"I am NOT trying to "redefine the phrase in order to score propoganda points." Those who equate "insurance" with "care" are the ones who have redefined the words to make them mean something that they do not mean."

Wrong. FOr twenty years, "universal health care" means plans that insure everyone. Insurance PAYS for care. You are being disingenous and trying to push a fundemantalistic literal interpretation on political statements and phrases. The "War on Poverty" wasn't really a war either.

[rateyes]

97. Bull, again.

"And Switzerland has universal health CARE. Walk into a hospital and you will recieve health CARE."

Walk into a hospital in the US of A, and you will receive health care, too. The law will not allow an emergency room to turn anyone away. So, I guess we already have "universal care" according to the way you want to define it.

Again, universal insurance does not equal universal care. I said it in the OP, contrasting the two words. I cannot help it if you have problems with comprehension with sentences that are clearly written.

Unless a person has insurance that will pay for all necessary treatments, that person does not have universal health care. I have health insurance. I DON'T have health CARE for every needed medical procedure. Therefore, while I have a plan that would fall under a "universal health insurance" plan...I still do not have "universal care."

[cuke]

103. Wrong again

"Walk into a hospital in the US of A, and you will receive health care, too"

Last weekend I took my mom to the hospital after she fell. They would not admit her.

"law will not allow an emergency room to turn anyone away."

Wrong again. Emergency rooms must STABILIZE the conditions of anyone who goes into the ER with a serious injury or life-threatening condition. Go into an ER without one of those, and you might be turned away, the way my mom was last weekend.

"Again, universal insurance does not equal universal care. I said it in the OP, contrasting the two words. I cannot help it if you have problems with comprehension with sentences that are clearly written."

Again, you are wrong. Universal health care has ALWAYS meant universal insurance coverage

"Unless a person has insurance that will pay for all necessary treatments, that person does not have universal health care. "

And again, "universal" has nothing to do with the quality of the coverage. It deals with who is covered (ie. everyone)

Universal means "everyone gets care". It does not mean that "everyone gets everything paid for". No health care plan in the entire world does that.

[eridani]

117. Yes, it does mean everyone is covered

Every procedure might not be, though.

[rateyes]

5. Two more words:

You're.wrong.

Medicare is NOT single payer. You are comparing apples and oranges.

Even health INSURANCE plans have limits to what is covered and what is not. And, the mandated insurance plans the candidates are spouting leaves millions UNDERINSURED, and, quite frankly, UNINSURED.

Ever try squeezing blood from a turnip?

Again. Universal insurance is not universal care.

[cuke]

8. Two more words - Straw man

"Medicare is NOT single payer"

I didn't say Medicare IS single payer. I said Medicare is NOT a health CARE program, as you falsely claimed in your OP and which you still haven't admitted was a mistake.

[rateyes]

46. Show me, in my OP where I said ANYTHING

about MEDICARE. Again, you are making shit up.

[cuke]

51. You didn't say it in your OP. You said it in a post

I was wrong about it being in your OP, but it is in your posts

[rateyes]

66. Show me. You are making an untrue accusation.

[parkerll]

6. Sans Insurance

Any "solution" to the health care problem that involves the insurance industry is no solution at all. Hillary's plan to require everyone to have health insurance sounds like a Republican's dream come true. Kucinich has already outlined how he would bring about single payer health care. We already pay for it, in the form of over 30% of insurance payments going to administrative overhead (versus 3% for government programs like the V.A. and Medicare).

I'm so pissed off at the morons running this country (the politicians) and the greedy bastards calling the shots (the corporate heads) that I'd like to leave.

[cuke]

10. DK's plan depends on insurance

Medicare is not a health CARE plan. Medicare does NOT provide any medical CARE

[eridani]

118. No, it says that the government pays for care.

That's what single PAYER means.

[rateyes]

11. Those are two good words.

Unless the insurance companies deliberately underinsure everyone, mandated insurance will bankrupt the insurance companies. If they are forced to pay all claims and cannot raise premiums beyond what people can afford, those 45 million people coming into the system will bankrupt it. And, doctors aren't going to work for chickens.

[cuke]

14. Mandated insurance must provide coverage at least as good as Medicare

under the plans proposed by the dem candidates.

Another ignorant distortion blown to pieces

[rateyes]

20. Do you know that there are two ends to this business?

Apparently not.

Do you even know what "single payer" means?

And, the mandated insurance CANNOT provide coverage as well as medicare does. To pay the claims the premiums will have to go beyond the uninsured's ability to pay for it, or else paying the claims will bankrupt the system.

:banghead:

[cuke]

25. Do you know how wrong you are?

"To pay the claims the premiums will have to go beyond the uninsured's ability to pay for it, or else paying the claims will bankrupt the system"

Wrong. With Medicare, the premiums aren't based on the claims. Medicare is non-profit, remember?

Medicare premiums are determined by law, not the marketplace. It won't "bankrupt the system" because the govt can finance the deficit with revenues from the Treasury

[rateyes]

40. There you go, mixing the arguments together again.

I AM NOT ARGUING FOR UNIVERSAL HEALTH INSURANCE. I AM ARGUING FOR UNIVERSAL HEALTH CARE. The two are not the same. I am for a single payer system where the government pays for the TOTAL cost of the health care.

And, if you think that insurance premiums won't rise with the increase in the cost of care, I have some ocean front property in Kansas I'd like to sell you.

[cuke]

48. Single payer is not health care. It's an insurance plan

The argument that these plan are not "universal health CARE plan" is propoganda.

No one, not even you, is suggesting that the govt supply the health care. All of the plans are about how to PAY for the health care. That's insurance, not health care.

"And, if you think that insurance premiums won't rise with the increase in the cost of care, I have some ocean front property in Kansas I'd like to sell you."

I don't think it's true. I know it's true

Just look at how much Medicare takes in premiums and how much it pays out in claims. Premiums have NEVER matched claims. NEVER. Not once.

[rateyes]

68. And, medicare premiums have never risen, right?

:banghead:

[cuke]

83. Medicare premiums have never risen

as fast as the claims have. You said the premiums would have to rise to keep up with claims.

Premiums have NEVER kept up with claims.

[rateyes]

93. Semantics.

You said that the government will pick up the tab in the difference. You know how they do that? They RAISE premiums, and they BORROW THE FUCKING MONEY. We are running defecits.

[cuke]

99. Facts

"You said that the government will pick up the tab in the difference. You know how they do that? They RAISE premiums, and they BORROW THE FUCKING MONEY. We are running defecits."

No, they appropriate more money from the general budget. Medicare is "off-budget". You're just making stuff up.

"We are running defecits"

So what does that have to do with Medicare premiums?

[rateyes]

110. And, tell me...

how solvent is Medicare? And, where does the money come from to pay the difference?

[cuke]

115. Medicare is solvent

and I already told you where the money comes from. Tax revenues, not Medicare premiums.

Try again

[slipslidingaway]

19. K&R! n/t

[Renew Deal]

26. I'm glad that people are starting to point this out.

The candidates have improperly borrowed the "Universal Healthcare" title for too long.

[Occam Bandage]

32. Single-payer isn't health care either. It's government-provided, tax-supported insurance.

You seem to be perhaps referring to socialized medicine in the mold of Britain, where hospitals are government-run. While Britain has a single-payer system, not all single-payer systems must have government-provided care.

[K Gardner]

42. It's single payer that provides total access to healthcare for ALL...

Semantics

Under HR 676, all medically necessary services are covered - primary care, inpatient care, outpatient care, emergency care, prescription drugs, durable medical equipment, long-term care, mental-health services, dentistry, eye care, chiropractic and substance-abuse treatment. Patients get to choose their physicians, providers, hospitals, clinics and practices with no co-pays or deductibles, and private health insurers are prohibited from selling coverage duplicating these benefits.

Medicare's 3 percent administrative costs are far less than the for-profits' 20 percent to 30 percent. And, not surprising is opposition to HR 676 from the 20 largest HMOs ($10.8 billion in profits in 2005) or the 12 top HMO executives (combined $222.6 million in compensation).

[rateyes]

55. Thank you. nt

[cuke]

57. Not true at all

It's "universality" that covers everyone, not single payer. Single payer could just as easily be a part of a non-universal plan as a non-single payer plans could.

Single payer is about who pays the claims. It has little to do with universality. It just happens that DK's single payer plan is universal.

[Occam Bandage]

73. Under that particular single-payer plan, it is comprehensive health insurance.

Not all single-payer plans must be comprehensive. One could easily imagine a single-payer plan that covered virtually nothing. Moreover, it is still health insurance and not health care, as the OP suggested.

[cuke]

84. The OP mixes apples and oranges and pineapples ,,,,

The OP doesn't seem to understand the differences between universality, coverage, and payment schemes

[Rosa Luxemburg]

47. God save the NHS!

the British health system works just aswell as the puffed-up profit making US health system.

In some areas, the NHS works much better!

[cuke]

59. That's because the issue is "profit", but some want to pretend it's about who pays

IMO, most of the people making this argument about how mandates are not "health CARE plans, they're health INSURANCE plans" do not care about covering everyone. They are more concerned with eliminating profit, but they wont say that.

[rateyes]

69. They are more concerned with eliminating profit, but they wont say that.

They won't say it, because it's not true.

[cuke]

86. Will you support a universal plan if it's not single payer

and allows for insurers to profit?

Yes or no? Given the choice between

a)covering everyone adequately but allowing insurers to profit

or

b) a single payer plan that either does not cover everyone or provides inadequate coverage,

which would you choose?

[rateyes]

108. Bogus choice:

But, to answer your question: No, I will not support a universal INSURANCE plan that does not provide universal CARE, regardless of who profits (or doesn't profit) from it.
Now, a question for you:

A.) Hillary's plan.

B.) Dennis Kucinich's plan.

Which is a better plan? Which provides the most coverage, and is more cost effective? (And, remember, you already conceded that Dennis' plan is "for profit." (BTW, I still don't like Dennis' plan.)

[cuke]

112. Like I said, providing care to the uninsured is not a priority for you

I go for A. Hillary's plan covers more than DK's does. DK's plan will provide Medicare for my mom. That's nothing. She is already covered by Medicare.

I do not care about how cost effective the plans are, but the dems plans do a lot to reduce the costs of health care. Clinton's plan provides the most comprehensive coverage that includes coverage for mental health, long term care, chronic conditions and their related problems, and preventive care

[rjones2818]

33. Two Words!

Dennis Kucinich! Period!

Go Dennis! :woohoo:]
http://dennis4president.com
Choose Peace!

[Rosa Luxemburg]

43. and 3 words

vote Dennis Kucinich!

[polichick]

54. Two words: Yes indeedy! nt